Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[lisa12000]

Agreed it is depressing but also necessary. The reason for the quarantine hotels and restrictions is because we (U.K.) are vaccinating much more quickly than most. Apparently we have vaccinated more people than France, Portugal and I think Spain combined! It is pointless to bring down our infection rates and then allow people to travel and restart the infections.
In my opinion it is better to remain restricted a little longer than risk infections rising and having to start again. The variants are appearing in greater quantities but that’s because the U.K. are actively looking for them so vaccines can be tweaked.
Australia, who have very few cases, have banned international travel till at least October and have only just allowed travel between states. We are not alone in restricting travel. It’s a complete pain but whilst the virus is at large in the world- and it is a worldwide pandemic- international travel must be restricted and mandatory quarantine enforced.
Now you can feel truly depressed!

So do you actually think 10 years in jail is proportionate? We are going down a really sticky path here one which is boxed in with no escape - it’s so difficult to lift these sorts of travel restrictions once they are in as Australia etc are finding!

viruses mutate that is their natural path, they spike in the winter season and retreat jn the summer - what is the point of vaccines if it does not mean a return to normal life at some point this year?

 

[MrHappy]

Be careful what you wish for.

Our cases in the UK have gone down from 68,000 a day to 12/13,000 this week and are currently dealing around 25% week on week. Hospitalisations and ICU cases are also going down, especially in the over 80s of which 90% have been vaccinated. We will have vaccinated around 25% of our people in a few days.

However, we are now using quarantine hotels if you come from a red list country (one of which is Portugal with Spain likely next), and our health minister has said if you dont declare you are coming back from a country such as this you can be thrown in jail for 10 years. Never mind its illegal to travel anyway, not only abroad but within the UK and even between counties in England.

We have the ridiculous situation where tonight a government source reassured parents that they can take their children to the playground 'for exercise' but they aren't allowed to socialise with other children or adults. We have been told today no summer holidays are likely either at home or abroad and that restrictions will be the same until the autumn when jabs for variants are produced!

We have no sign or no hope of getting out of this any time soon - in fact the restrictions seem to be getting worse. We seem to be finding variants behind every sofa which will keep us locked up for most of this year IMO - very depressing

Follow the facts on your own. I’m hopeful.

 

[MrHappy]

what is the point of vaccines if it does not mean a return to normal life at some point this year?

I understand my disenfranchised friend, I haven’t followed your country but I have followed the data. Stay patient. These vaccines are real.

 

[matt9112]

So I'm against this (not that it matters ). It sets a dangerous precedent.

Precedent doesn't matter to the higher intellectuals of this forum only stoping covid spread period full stop matters. Dosen't matter what the costs are.

 

[matt9112]

Some people don't want to wear clothes in public either but you still have to. People need to get over themselves and just be honest with everyone. Some don't like wearing masks because they want to be jerks and prove some stupid point. Its not medical, its not comfort its just them not liking being told to do something. There are very very very few actual medical reasons and that only effects an extremely super small number of people. Comfort is NOT a valid reason.

The people who die from covid are only a small number of people (compared to the population as a whole) soooo i mean your point works both ways.

For the record i wear my mask when around others. But its my choice to do so.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Precedent doesn't matter to the higher intellectuals of this forum only stoping covid spread period full stop matters. Dosen't matter what the costs are.

...you seem Like you have something more you want to say?

The people who die from covid are only a small number of people (compared to the population as a whole) soooo i mean your point works both ways.

For the record i wear my mask when around others. But its my choice to do so.

...you seem Like you have something more you want to say?

 

[DisneyCane]

According to this:

Federal officials do have powers to restrict travel between states during a pandemic, according to the Public Health Service Act that uses language from an 1890 law allowing the federal government to make and enforce regulations to prevent the spread of communicable diseases “from one State or possession into any other State or possession.”

Read more here: https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/white-house/article249154715.html#storylink=cpy

This is from the US code on the official government site of the House of Representatives:

§264. Regulations to control communicable diseases​

(a) Promulgation and enforcement by Surgeon General​

The Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary, is authorized to make and enforce such regulations as in his judgment are necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession. For purposes of carrying out and enforcing such regulations, the Surgeon General may provide for such inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination, destruction of animals or articles found to be so infected or contaminated as to be sources of dangerous infection to human beings, and other measures, as in his judgment may be necessary.

(b) Apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals​

Regulations prescribed under this section shall not provide for the apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals except for the purpose of preventing the introduction, transmission, or spread of such communicable diseases as may be specified from time to time in Executive orders of the President upon the recommendation of the Secretary, in consultation with the Surgeon General,1.

(c) Application of regulations to persons entering from foreign countries​

Except as provided in subsection (d), regulations prescribed under this section, insofar as they provide for the apprehension, detention, examination, or conditional release of individuals, shall be applicable only to individuals coming into a State or possession from a foreign country or a possession.

(d) Apprehension and examination of persons reasonably believed to be infected​

(1) Regulations prescribed under this section may provide for the apprehension and examination of any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage and (A) to be moving or about to move from a State to another State; or (B) to be a probable source of infection to individuals who, while infected with such disease in a qualifying stage, will be moving from a State to another State. Such regulations may provide that if upon examination any such individual is found to be infected, he may be detained for such time and in such manner as may be reasonably necessary. For purposes of this subsection, the term "State" includes, in addition to the several States, only the District of Columbia.

(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term "qualifying stage", with respect to a communicable disease, means that such disease-

(A) is in a communicable stage; or

(B) is in a precommunicable stage, if the disease would be likely to cause a public health emergency if transmitted to other individuals.

(e) Preemption​

Nothing in this section or section 266 of this title, or the regulations promulgated under such sections, may be construed as superseding any provision under State law (including regulations and including provisions established by political subdivisions of States), except to the extent that such a provision conflicts with an exercise of Federal authority under this section or section 266 of this title.

(July 1, 1944, ch. 373, title III, §361, 58 Stat. 703 ; 1953 Reorg. Plan No. 1, §§5, 8, eff. Apr. 11, 1953, 18 F.R. 2053, 67 Stat. 631; Pub. L. 86–624, §29(c), July 12, 1960, 74 Stat. 419 ; Pub. L. 94–317, title III, §301(b)(1), June 23, 1976, 90 Stat. 707 ; Pub. L. 107–188, title I, §142(a)(1), (2), (b)(1), (c), June 12, 2002, 116 Stat. 626 , 627.)

I have bolded what I believe is the key clause in this law which allows the law to be constitutional. It states clearly, "any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage." It is not reasonable to believe that every person located in a single State is infected with COVID when, based on the data, less than 0.04% of the population is infected daily. I also bolded the "qualifying stages." Based upon what I have read, the prevailing thought is that a person is contagious for around 5 days. That takes us up to less than 0.2% of the population that "is in a communicable stage." If you add 5 days of incubation period and consider that "a precommunicable stage" you still end up with less than 0.4% of the population which would qualify, on an individual basis, for a travel ban.

That is nowhere near the level that it would take to "reasonably believe" that everybody within the borders of a State is infected with SARS-Cov-2 is in a "qualifying stage."

The law would allow travel restriction of individuals who have been discovered via contact tracing as high risk of having been infected or anybody who has tested positive. That would be "reasonable" from a legal standpoint. A blanket travel ban applied to everybody located within any particular State borders would likely be struck down by the Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote unless a much higher percentage of the population was found to be infected.

Regardless, it isn't going to happen. It's just a shot across the bow done via a leak to try and get Desantis to add restrictions or mandates.

As an aside, section (d) would seem to make a testing requirement for travel illegal as well for the same reason as a test would be considered an "examination."

 

[GimpYancIent]

This is from the US code on the official government site of the House of Representatives:


I have bolded what I believe is the key clause in this law which allows the law to be constitutional. It states clearly, "any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage." It is not reasonable to believe that every person located in a single State is infected with COVID when, based on the data, less than 0.04% of the population is infected daily. I also bolded the "qualifying stages." Based upon what I have read, the prevailing thought is that a person is contagious for around 5 days. That takes us up to less than 0.2% of the population that "is in a communicable stage." If you add 5 days of incubation period and consider that "a precommunicable stage" you still end up with less than 0.4% of the population which would qualify, on an individual basis, for a travel ban.

That is nowhere near the level that it would take to "reasonably believe" that everybody within the borders of a State is infected with SARS-Cov-2 is in a "qualifying stage."

The law would allow travel restriction of individuals who have been discovered via contact tracing as high risk of having been infected or anybody who has tested positive. That would be "reasonable" from a legal standpoint. A blanket travel ban applied to everybody located within any particular State borders would likely be struck down by the Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote unless a much higher percentage of the population was found to be infected.

Regardless, it isn't going to happen. It's just a shot across the bow done via a leak to try and get Desantis to add restrictions or mandates.

As an aside, section (d) would seem to make a testing requirement for travel illegal as well for the same reason as a test would be considered an "examination."

Travel bans have done nothing. Actually travel bans have irritated a lot of people and adversely effected communities in negative ways. Lastly every time a travel ban has been supposedly implemented travel continued anyway plus the "communicable disease" that was supposed to be stopped was already through, there and beyond. It has become more media spin if anything.

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

Joe Biden needs to take a hike, we can’t take another financial hit, what’s the motive behind all this? I don’t get political but after reading about these White House ordered domestic travel bans im ticked. They used travel bans against Trump now there increasing them. So many Disney employees have already suffered enough. Joe Biden said he has a plan to finally get us on track, to stop this virus and where going backwards.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

This is from the US code on the official government site of the House of Representatives:


I have bolded what I believe is the key clause in this law which allows the law to be constitutional. It states clearly, "any individual reasonably believed to be infected with a communicable disease in a qualifying stage." It is not reasonable to believe that every person located in a single State is infected with COVID when, based on the data, less than 0.04% of the population is infected daily. I also bolded the "qualifying stages." Based upon what I have read, the prevailing thought is that a person is contagious for around 5 days. That takes us up to less than 0.2% of the population that "is in a communicable stage." If you add 5 days of incubation period and consider that "a precommunicable stage" you still end up with less than 0.4% of the population which would qualify, on an individual basis, for a travel ban.

That is nowhere near the level that it would take to "reasonably believe" that everybody within the borders of a State is infected with SARS-Cov-2 is in a "qualifying stage."

The law would allow travel restriction of individuals who have been discovered via contact tracing as high risk of having been infected or anybody who has tested positive. That would be "reasonable" from a legal standpoint. A blanket travel ban applied to everybody located within any particular State borders would likely be struck down by the Supreme Court in a 9-0 vote unless a much higher percentage of the population was found to be infected.

Regardless, it isn't going to happen. It's just a shot across the bow done via a leak to try and get Desantis to add restrictions or mandates.

As an aside, section (d) would seem to make a testing requirement for travel illegal as well for the same reason as a test would be considered an "examination."

Not to take a side here, although my opinion on some of these things are known.. there is a precedent for both sides. It’s just another thing, in a long list of things over this past year that can swing either way.

The Constitutional Consequences of Governmental Responses to COVID-19: The Right to Travel and the Dormant Commerce Clause

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented governmental actions at the federal, state, and local levels. Those actions have raised substantial constitutional questions.

www.gibsondunn.com

 

[THEMEPARKPIONEER]

Not to take a side here, although my opinion on some of these things are known.. there is a precedent for both sides. It’s just another thing, in a long list of things over this past year that can swing either way.

The Constitutional Consequences of Governmental Responses to COVID-19: The Right to Travel and the Dormant Commerce Clause

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in unprecedented governmental actions at the federal, state, and local levels. Those actions have raised substantial constitutional questions.

www.gibsondunn.com

Totally true, what is our government invested in is my main concern

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Totally true, what is our government invested in is my main concern

Hopefully not dogecoin.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Hopefully not dogecoin.

Or Gamestop.

 

[SplashJacket]

Joe Biden needs to take a hike, we can’t take another financial hit, what’s the motive behind all this? I don’t get political but after reading about these White House ordered domestic travel bans im ticked. They used travel bans against Trump now there increasing them. So many Disney employees have already suffered enough. Joe Biden said he has a plan to finally get us on track, to stop this virus and where going backwards.

It's important to remember that this more hearsay than anything. If you look up "domestic travel ban" all the sites reporting on it are Disney sites. This isn't a White House ordered domestic travel ban, because it hasn't been ordered. Could it be ordered tomorrow, yes, but why don't we reserve complaints until it comes to fruition.

 

[JoeCamel]

It's important to remember that this more hearsay than anything. If you look up "domestic travel ban" all the sites reporting on it are Disney sites. This isn't a White House ordered domestic travel ban, because it hasn't been ordered. Could it be ordered tomorrow, yes, but why don't we reserve complaints until it comes to fruition.

Nah, more fun to hate now, later it might be OK

 

[rylouisbo]

I started double-masking last week and was initially concerned that my breathing would feel constricted. It took me a minute or so to adjust, but I can honestly say that I no longer perceive any difference between breathing through one mask and breathing through two.

i actually quadruple mask and its super easy to breath too!

 

[correcaminos]

Nah, more fun to hate now, later it might be OK

But but but.... because someone who thinks the president is a meanie brat cannot just make things up for clicks?

To be fair, I have no issues with travel bans but that ship has long sailed as a possibility nationality

 

[GoofGoof]

Joe Biden needs to take a hike, we can’t take another financial hit, what’s the motive behind all this? I don’t get political but after reading about these White House ordered domestic travel bans im ticked. They used travel bans against Trump now there increasing them. So many Disney employees have already suffered enough. Joe Biden said he has a plan to finally get us on track, to stop this virus and where going backwards.

When was there a White House ordered domestic travel ban?

 

[danlb_2000]

I know people are generally wimpy about masks, but just anecdotally I can say that I’ve been double masking since September while teaching all day (kn95 with surgical over). I’m also 8 months pregnant. It’s really not a big deal. Sometimes I’ve gone outside if I get dizzy cuz it’s already a little harder to breathe teaching all day while growing a human, but you get used to it. Access is totally different. But I’m always amazed when people complain. On my preps I just wear the surgical and it feels like wearing a cloud in comparison

Is there really any benefit to adding a surgical mask over a kn95?

 

[DisneyDebRob]

When was there a White House ordered domestic travel ban?

Never.