• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

_caleb

Well-Known Member
Yeah, there’s a lot of people who prefer recommendations over requirements. So far I haven’t seen that work in this country. Many people want masks to just be a recommendation and not a requirement at a place like WDW. That isn‘t going to help it’s just going to lead to more people not doing what they need to do. In many cases even when stuff is required and not optional it’s still hard to get people to comply.
Yeah, it makes me sad that citizens of our country won’t just do the right thing without being forced to do so (and even when things are mandated, we see them all push back, “oh, yeah? How are you going to enforce that!”).
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Here’s an example of clear recommendations vs. orders for COVID measures:

I’m proud of how responsible our governor has been since the very beginning. I believe Illinois was the second state to shelter in place, and our numbers were pretty good until recently.

The problem is that the restrictions are not being followed as well now. Indoor restaurant dining has been banned for a week or so, but when I picked up our carry out order from one last Saturday, they were serving inside. We passed others that were letting people inside. In fact, they are almost all taking online reservations, and none are for outside dining.

I just saw a teaser for the news tonight talking about restaurants “fighting back.” I don’t know what the governor is going to do if none of them close for indoor dining. He can’t put them all out of business.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member

oceanbreeze77

Well-Known Member
This story got lost in the pre-election news blitz, but I think it's an important one and deserves a link now:

The deaths are very sad, but I think something we should really be focused on right now is the long haul effect. We haven't been with this virus for a year and many who were sick in the spring are still suffering now. Imagine being out of breath after walking a few minutes. Imagine not being able to remember your own name at moments. Imagine losing big chunks of your hair months after you had the virus. Imagine not knowing exactly what is happening to your body.

The after effects are perhaps the scariest element of this virus. We still dont have the big picture and we still dont know much about it, bodies could be permanently severely damaged, people could drop dead a year after having the virus, we just dont know.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
I’m proud of how responsible our governor has been since the very beginning. I believe Illinois was the second state to shelter in place, and our numbers were pretty good until recently.

The problem is that the restrictions are not being followed as well now. Indoor restaurant dining has been banned for a week or so, but when I picked up our carry out order from one last Saturday, they were serving inside. We passed others that were letting people inside. In fact, they are almost all taking online reservations, and none are for outside dining.

I just saw a teaser for the news tonight talking about restaurants “fighting back.” I don’t know what the governor is going to do if none of them close for indoor dining. He can’t put them all out of business.
This is why communication and public messaging is so important to public health. The governor can’t put them all out of business (not sure he’d want to), but the public can be convinced to do the right thing and stay home.

Asking politely is a good start. Building trust and good will is important. But I agree, noncompliance is tough to fight.
 

TrainChasers

Well-Known Member
It would never be possible to require only curbside or delivery. There are far too many people (older or due to economic reasons) that do not have internet and would be unable to place their orders ahead of time.
For those without Internet, you could phone your order in.

Again, I’m not saying this is necessary. I’m just saying it’s possible.
 

FeelsSoGoodToBeBad

Well-Known Member
For those without Internet, you could phone your order in.

Again, I’m not saying this is necessary. I’m just saying it’s possible.
That would probably work for smaller orders (or exceedingly organized people, unlike myself when it comes to the grocery shopping). I would eventually have to either have a website to browse or be able to go in, otherwise I'm gonna forget to get my kids lemon juice for them to make their lemonade every. time. 🤷‍♀️ 😂
 

senor_jorge

Nationality: Swiss for all things FP+
Even in the “big, annoying, non-‘merican” states...there is neither the funds nor personnel to guard the public from the private.

And that’s what this is: every idiot that does what they want can spread their stupidity to the public by a multiplication factor.

I’d make the argument that this is the most embarrassing week in our country’s history - 2 very obvious factors - and its a very easy argument to make.

The glimmer is the “the night is darkest before the dawn” theory.

Expect the future to ask for someone to hold their beer shortly.
 

_caleb

Well-Known Member
So I‘m not entirely up to speed on the vaccination conversation, but are Pfizer’s claims about their vaccine anything more than just their claims? I know they’re claiming 90% effectiveness (and now 1 year of immunity), but has this been verified by anyone else?
 

Patcheslee

Well-Known Member
So I‘m not entirely up to speed on the vaccination conversation, but are Pfizer’s claims about their vaccine anything more than just their claims? I know they’re claiming 90% effectiveness (and now 1 year of immunity), but has this been verified by anyone else?
How can they know one year if we haven't even been dealing with covid for a year yet? Is there some scientific equation used to calculate how long or something?
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
How can they know one year if we haven't even been dealing with covid for a year yet? Is there some scientific equation used to calculate how long or something?
Sort of, although I don't know the specifics for the Pfizer vaccine. Some immune markers are known to decline in levels consistent with 1st order kinematics (meaning, that the proportion of the effect declines at a constant rate, as opposed to the absolute level declining by a constant rate). So perhaps measuring these levels, they can extrapolate that the efficacy should be around for at least a year. But that's just a guess.
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
How can they know one year if we haven't even been dealing with covid for a year yet? Is there some scientific equation used to calculate how long or something?
One year is a safe bet based on how long antibodies are present a few months after the vaccine. Most scientists are theorizing it would last a lot longer based on other parts of the immune system having longer term 'memory' than the amount of antigens suggest (based on those who caught the virus). So, 'for one year' sounds like a safe hedge. It's likely to be more, but, you'd need longer periods of testing to determine that to make that claim ("that's how science works" -me ;) ).

The 90% effective is simple math based on how many fewer people in the vaccine group didn't get the virus compared to the number in the placebo group that did.

The FDA's task force that will go over the data is due to do so before Thanksgiving. We presume Pfizer will publish their data for transparency. We should also presume there are European scientist eyes on the data since Pfizer did get some money from there.

If emergency use is granted, the trial group plus many more who will start getting the vaccine will continue to be tracked.
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
So I‘m not entirely up to speed on the vaccination conversation, but are Pfizer’s claims about their vaccine anything more than just their claims? I know they’re claiming 90% effectiveness (and now 1 year of immunity), but has this been verified by anyone else?
We'll see once they submit their analysis to the FDA. Unless they really want to see their reputation destroyed, I would assume they are confident of their numbers and this isn't all just a stock-manipulation ruse.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
So I‘m not entirely up to speed on the vaccination conversation, but are Pfizer’s claims about their vaccine anything more than just their claims? I know they’re claiming 90% effectiveness (and now 1 year of immunity), but has this been verified by anyone else?
The 90% is not Pfizer at all. They are blinded and have no idea whether people in the trial that got infected got the vaccine or the placebo. Once they hit the threshold number of positives (threshold was 53 but they actually had 94) then an independent board reviews the results of the trial and when they are done they let Pfizer know what the results were. The Pfizer CEO said he was called on Sunday and told the results which were released publicly on Monday. Moderna has said publicly that they have also reached the threshold of infections and that the independent board is reviewing their results so there’s a good chance we hear something any day now on the results. The 1 year estimate came from the CEO and founder of BioNTech who is Pfizer’s partner. He said in an interview that he thinks the vaccine will protect patients for a significant period of time and he personally believes it may be a year or longer. That’s an educated guess from someone who has more access than we do to the data, but it’s no lock to be true.

The next step is Pfizer needs to have 50% of their trial participants hit 2 months since their second injection before they can apply for emergency use authorization. That will happen next week. Once they apply it’s expected that the FDA will take several weeks to review before approval. Pfizer has said that they will be ready to start injecting people the day after they receive approval so assuming the safety data is all good (so far so good) that means the first patients stuck ore the end of 2020.
 

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
So I‘m not entirely up to speed on the vaccination conversation, but are Pfizer’s claims about their vaccine anything more than just their claims? I know they’re claiming 90% effectiveness (and now 1 year of immunity), but has this been verified by anyone else?

Also, the 90% number wasn't from Pfizer, it was from an independent board that reviews the data. It's the same reason Moderna hasn't released numbers even though they have reached the statistical # of cases where they could - the data is reviewed by independent outsiders.


Edit: as Goof said in much more detail as I was typing! :)
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom