DC0703
Well-Known Member
Illinois is opening to 16+ on April 12th, for all counties except Cook County (Chicago)
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion
- Thread starter Parker in NYC
- Start date
-
- Tags
- coronavirus covid covid-19
- Status
Illinois is opening to 16+ on April 12th, for all counties except Cook County (Chicago)
Chi84
Premium Member
Demand is still far exceeding supply here. It’s still pretty hard to find appointments. Loretto Hospital got in trouble because the hospital CEO has a condo in Trump Tower and started using its allotment of vaccine for the workers there. Then apparently moved on to Cook County judges and their wives
Disney Experience
Well-Known Member
I liked the article you linked. It would have been of more clarity if it had spoken(i.e. referenced studies, as it is a meta study) to non N95/KN95 masks. It alluded that some of the studies it summarized did not break it down into different types of masks. So I did find a small study, but its scope and other aspects are not perfect. (My following comments are in reference to the article linked below, not the article @havoc315 linked above)Actually, we have lots of evidence that the wearing of masks is very effective. While N95 masks are more effective, there is a growing and already massive amount of evidence that all masks are at least somewhat effective.
An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19
The science around the use of masks by the public to impede COVID-19 transmission is advancing rapidly. In this narrative review, we develop an analytical framework to examine mask usage, synthesizing the relevant literature to inform multiple areas: population impact, transmission...www.pnas.org
For anyone curious about how effective or ineffective different types of masks are here is a very small study that tried to get come clarity on that subject (But I have a few concerns with it, but it was published and I assumed peer reviewed in Nature). Though the study is small and the results may therefore be confounded with other unrecognized variables. It still interesting to see. It shows that N95(vented! they had no unvented n95 for the experiment) do help a lot, Kn95 a bit , but the homemade cloth masks seemed to be worse than no masks in amount of particles out. (That seems weird to me). So some of the results may go against what I would expect , but it was published by Nature.
They also did not study the particle amounts escaping from gaps in the masks which was left for future a future study.
Generally (to me ) the idea behind masks (in Pandemic general population) is to limit the distance the aerosols/droplets travel, and that was not the subject of the paper linked below either.
But It has a lot of linked references to different types of studies of masks' effectiveness ranging from epidemiology, clinical, and laboratory studies that were published before it's publication late September 2020.
Efficacy of masks and face coverings in controlling outward aerosol particle emission from expiratory activities - Scientific Reports
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a surge in demand for facemasks to protect against disease transmission. In response to shortages, many public health authorities have recommended homemade masks as acceptable alternatives to surgical masks and N95 respirators. Although mask wearing is intended...
www.nature.com
Here are the types of masks (and no mask) they had in their experiment: (I would have loved to have seen a non N95/kn-95/surgical mask that was massed produced used in the study, but none were. I think they were looking at homemade masks vs more medical grade masks. So they made homemade masks, with what level of quality/consistency control? There were Kn95/N95(Vented!)/surgical masks in the study and they are commercial products. They did not try an unvented N95 but relied on the kn95 equivalent. KN95 is good to have in the studies because they are more commonly used in certain professions than the harder to get non-vented N95 certified masks.
If the study had a lot more people then there might be even clearer results, outliers and study protocol could also cloud results. (Did they have each subject try each masks? Looks like they did not, they even did not have enough N95 masks for more than two subjects!
Last edited:
rogerrabbitfan9
Active Member
What side of Pa? The impression I’ve gotten from other social media sites is that in at least western Pa there are open appointment slots now if you qualify, but you’re going to have to be a little aggressive to find them.
correcaminos
Well-Known Member
Demand is quite high here. I spent a lot of time today helping others. Some were luckier than others. The ones willing to drive to more rural areas, are getting luckier. Shame on that CEO for doing what they did though.Demand is still far exceeding supply here. It’s still pretty hard to find appointments. Loretto Hospital got in trouble because the hospital CEO has a condo in Trump Tower and started using its allotment of vaccine for the workers there. Then apparently moved on to Cook County judges and their wives
vikescaper
Well-Known Member
I was able to secure a vaccination reservation at the Orange County convention center for this Friday! This is a huge sigh of relief as we have had two positive test results recently at work.
Disney Experience
Well-Known Member
Still hard for some in Florida to get appointments. Anecdotally today I was in a Uber vehicle and the driver is 62 and diabetic. He tried a number of times to get an appointment with no success. (I do not know how hard he tried). He said, "All I want is the vaccine card". He then said he could not visit for emotional support a relative who was in a hospital in another state, and feels that the vaccine card would have made it possible. So he is not worried for his own health or herd immunity, rather it is more for what he feels the vaccine "card" will allow him to do if there is a family emergency. Just a simple single sample point, I was surprise that given his comorbidities and age he has not yet gotten vaccinated yet. Do not know if he just stopped trying, but he seemed at least a bit motivated to get vaccinated.
Last edited:
Disney Experience
Well-Known Member
Hehe I go in Wednesday for my 6 month trial visit. I will see if I can get a card too. Though I am dieting...so I really should not use the card to get free donuts (But I may a few times during the diet)
correcaminos
Well-Known Member
I am trying to diet too, but I have a 13yo that will eat it. I'll see if I get one tomorrow.
Chomama
Well-Known Member
Hang in there! The next day or two may be rough but it is worth it!
GhostHost1000
Premium Member
Saw where TN announced everyone 16 and up will be able to get a vaccine starting on April 5th.
pixie225
Well-Known Member
I have also been trying to get vaccine appts. for some elderly neighbors. It definitely takes time and patience - mostly time. They are opening a mass vaccination site at Nassau Coliseum with registration at 8 a.m. Will be on several computers and phones trying for appts.. I definitely see a flaw in the system for those who are not computer literate. It is especially frustrating when you are in a virtual line, and then get "timed out" or get in the "room" and find no appts available. Or on phone and all you get is a busy signal. The pop-up sites they are making available for residents are not widely advertised- even for residents in that zip code. Hopefully with more vaccine coming our way (supposedly a million doses a week, as our county supervisor just said in the news) things will be easier.
"Results from a U.S. trial of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine may have included “outdated information” and that could mean the company provided an incomplete view of efficacy data, American federal health officials said early Tuesday.
A spokesman from the drug company said Tuesday it was “looking into it.”
AstraZeneca reported Monday that its COVID-19 vaccine provided strong protection among adults of all ages in a long-anticipated U.S. study, a finding that some experts hoped would help rebuild public confidence in the shot around the world and move it a step closer to clearance in the U.S.
In the study of more than 30,000 people, the company reported that the vaccine was found to be 79% effective at preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19 — including in older adults. There were no severe illnesses or hospitalizations among vaccinated volunteers, compared with five such cases in participants who received dummy shots — a small number, but consistent with findings from Britain and other countries that the vaccine protects against the worst of the disease.
AstraZeneca also said the study’s independent safety monitors found no serious side effects, including no increased risk of rare blood clots like those identified in Europe, a scare that led numerous countries to briefly suspend vaccinations last week.
But just hours after those encouraging results were reported, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases issued an unusual statement.
The agency said the Data and Safety Monitoring Board “expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data.”
“We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible,” the statement added.
The company aims to file an application with the Food and Drug Administration in the coming weeks, and the government’s outside advisers will then publicly debate the evidence.
Authorization and guidelines for use of the vaccine in the United States will be determined by the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after thorough review of the data by independent advisory committees."
apnews.com
A spokesman from the drug company said Tuesday it was “looking into it.”
AstraZeneca reported Monday that its COVID-19 vaccine provided strong protection among adults of all ages in a long-anticipated U.S. study, a finding that some experts hoped would help rebuild public confidence in the shot around the world and move it a step closer to clearance in the U.S.
In the study of more than 30,000 people, the company reported that the vaccine was found to be 79% effective at preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19 — including in older adults. There were no severe illnesses or hospitalizations among vaccinated volunteers, compared with five such cases in participants who received dummy shots — a small number, but consistent with findings from Britain and other countries that the vaccine protects against the worst of the disease.
AstraZeneca also said the study’s independent safety monitors found no serious side effects, including no increased risk of rare blood clots like those identified in Europe, a scare that led numerous countries to briefly suspend vaccinations last week.
But just hours after those encouraging results were reported, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases issued an unusual statement.
The agency said the Data and Safety Monitoring Board “expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data.”
“We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible,” the statement added.
The company aims to file an application with the Food and Drug Administration in the coming weeks, and the government’s outside advisers will then publicly debate the evidence.
Authorization and guidelines for use of the vaccine in the United States will be determined by the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after thorough review of the data by independent advisory committees."
AstraZeneca accused of cherry-picking vaccine study data
WASHINGTON (AP) — AstraZeneca may have included “outdated information” in touting the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine in a U.S. study, federal health officials said Tuesday in an unusual public rift that could further erode confidence in the shot.
apnews.com
correcaminos
Well-Known Member
Honestly I am not dissing this vaccine but glad the US doesn't need it. Just seems like a long shot at this point. I wouldn't hesitate to take it, but maybe it can be a better use to our neighbors."Results from a U.S. trial of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine may have included “outdated information” and that could mean the company provided an incomplete view of efficacy data, American federal health officials said early Tuesday.
A spokesman from the drug company said Tuesday it was “looking into it.”
AstraZeneca reported Monday that its COVID-19 vaccine provided strong protection among adults of all ages in a long-anticipated U.S. study, a finding that some experts hoped would help rebuild public confidence in the shot around the world and move it a step closer to clearance in the U.S.
In the study of more than 30,000 people, the company reported that the vaccine was found to be 79% effective at preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19 — including in older adults. There were no severe illnesses or hospitalizations among vaccinated volunteers, compared with five such cases in participants who received dummy shots — a small number, but consistent with findings from Britain and other countries that the vaccine protects against the worst of the disease.
AstraZeneca also said the study’s independent safety monitors found no serious side effects, including no increased risk of rare blood clots like those identified in Europe, a scare that led numerous countries to briefly suspend vaccinations last week.
But just hours after those encouraging results were reported, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases issued an unusual statement.
The agency said the Data and Safety Monitoring Board “expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data.”
“We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible,” the statement added.
The company aims to file an application with the Food and Drug Administration in the coming weeks, and the government’s outside advisers will then publicly debate the evidence.
Authorization and guidelines for use of the vaccine in the United States will be determined by the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after thorough review of the data by independent advisory committees."
AstraZeneca accused of cherry-picking vaccine study data
WASHINGTON (AP) — AstraZeneca may have included “outdated information” in touting the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine in a U.S. study, federal health officials said Tuesday in an unusual public rift that could further erode confidence in the shot.
Kevin_W
Well-Known Member
I remember reading about this nasal spray some time ago, here's a newer article:
www.timesofisrael.com
Still not a lot of detail, like how long it is effective for if pre-exposure, or how long after exposure you should use it. Are there long-term side effects? If it worked, I could see using this like a morning allergy spray. Particularly durign cold/flu season or while travelling.
‘Life-saving’ nose spray that kills 99.9% of viruses begins production in Israel
Health Ministry-approved labeling says antiviral is effective within 2 minutes; can save many lives in countries without access to vaccines, says inventor
www.timesofisrael.com
Still not a lot of detail, like how long it is effective for if pre-exposure, or how long after exposure you should use it. Are there long-term side effects? If it worked, I could see using this like a morning allergy spray. Particularly durign cold/flu season or while travelling.
Heppenheimer
Well-Known Member
Color me a bit skeptical. They tout that it kills "99.9%" of viruses, but no mention if it actually prevents infection if exposed. 99.9% may sound impressive, but when you're dealing with viral loads measured in powers of 10, a 99.9% could still leave millions to billions of viral particles unaffected.I remember reading about this nasal spray some time ago, here's a newer article:
‘Life-saving’ nose spray that kills 99.9% of viruses begins production in Israel
Health Ministry-approved labeling says antiviral is effective within 2 minutes; can save many lives in countries without access to vaccines, says inventor
Still not a lot of detail, like how long it is effective for if pre-exposure, or how long after exposure you should use it. Are there long-term side effects? If it worked, I could see using this like a morning allergy spray. Particularly durign cold/flu season or while travelling.
This sounds a bit too much like products that are touted as a cure for "cancer", as if cancer was a single disease that could ever respond to a single agent..
Something definitely feels wrong at the AstraZeneca management level. Everything may be completely fine and their vaccine just as good as any of the others. But, it feels like they're making rookie mistakes and sloppy at the management level. I'm assuming the science is completely fine, especially since areas using it seem to be doing well. It definitely doesn't present a good image though."Results from a U.S. trial of AstraZeneca’s COVID-19 vaccine may have included “outdated information” and that could mean the company provided an incomplete view of efficacy data, American federal health officials said early Tuesday.
A spokesman from the drug company said Tuesday it was “looking into it.”
AstraZeneca reported Monday that its COVID-19 vaccine provided strong protection among adults of all ages in a long-anticipated U.S. study, a finding that some experts hoped would help rebuild public confidence in the shot around the world and move it a step closer to clearance in the U.S.
In the study of more than 30,000 people, the company reported that the vaccine was found to be 79% effective at preventing symptomatic cases of COVID-19 — including in older adults. There were no severe illnesses or hospitalizations among vaccinated volunteers, compared with five such cases in participants who received dummy shots — a small number, but consistent with findings from Britain and other countries that the vaccine protects against the worst of the disease.
AstraZeneca also said the study’s independent safety monitors found no serious side effects, including no increased risk of rare blood clots like those identified in Europe, a scare that led numerous countries to briefly suspend vaccinations last week.
But just hours after those encouraging results were reported, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases issued an unusual statement.
The agency said the Data and Safety Monitoring Board “expressed concern that AstraZeneca may have included outdated information from that trial, which may have provided an incomplete view of the efficacy data.”
“We urge the company to work with the DSMB to review the efficacy data and ensure the most accurate, up-to-date efficacy data be made public as quickly as possible,” the statement added.
The company aims to file an application with the Food and Drug Administration in the coming weeks, and the government’s outside advisers will then publicly debate the evidence.
Authorization and guidelines for use of the vaccine in the United States will be determined by the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after thorough review of the data by independent advisory committees."
AstraZeneca accused of cherry-picking vaccine study data
WASHINGTON (AP) — AstraZeneca may have included “outdated information” in touting the effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine in a U.S. study, federal health officials said Tuesday in an unusual public rift that could further erode confidence in the shot.
ABQ
Well-Known Member
Really seems that demand is unfortunately waning from the middle and higher aged groups. Younger ages will be even less demand overall. Will be interesting to see just where the percentage of population taking the vaccine plateaus.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Overall in the US we are up to 69.2% of the 65+ group vaccinated. Demand is very different from state to state and even areas within the state. I still know some 65+ people in PA who are searching but haven’t been able to find an appointment. It seems like in a lot of other states the demand is slowing. Herd immunity could very well be reached geographically but not nationally which is bad news for a place like WDW which attracts guests from all over.
One thing to consider is this is just the initial phase of vaccinating the people who said they wanted the vaccine as soon as it was available. Most people who have gotten the vaccine so far has made a pretty substantial effort to do so. The pull phase is coming real soon when there is more of an effort to pull people off of the fence and bring them in. Completely anecdotal, but my parent’s neighbor is 65+ and wants the vaccine but she isn’t going to scramble to get an appointment, she told them she would just wait until she could go to her doctor’s office to get it. I think there are going to be a lot of people in that category. The next phase will need to attract them in and success or failure will depend on who well we accomplish that. The speed at which we relax restrictions is also going to be based on how fast we vaccinate people.
- Status