Yes, feeling superior about the severity of a pandemic is another of the accomplishments my parents always hoped for.
-
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
39.2% of 16+ in my area have gotten their first shot, 27% are fully vaccinated. (Yes, those are adult-only numbers). Full eligibility just opened here in Virginia this week, so hopefully many more to come.
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
If you ignore someone who created a thread, any thread they created disappears from view unless you scroll to the bottom of the page and click "show ignored". I believe you no longer receive notifications for that thread as well.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I have an 11 year old. I would not take him to WDW if they required him to take multiple Covid tests. I’d just go to the beach or a National park or something. There’s plenty of other stuff to do for vacations besides WDW. Once my kids are eligible I’d have no problem with requiring proof of vaccination, but I’m not doing the test thing.
I also would probably not want to go to WDW anyway in that case since the only reason you would need a vaccine passport is if community spread is still high. So if community spread remains high (like it still is today) count me out on theme parks either way. I have no desire to be mixed in with all those strangers, especially if they loosen safety protocols but people are exploiting the 72 hour loophole. An unvaccinated person tests negative and then spends 2 days doing god knows what that could lead to infection and then presents a negative test at the gate and walks around with no masks and distancing anymore. Seems like a bad idea to get involved in that if community spread is still high. If community spread is low enough then there’s no need for a passport.
That's what I thought. So there must be a lot of extra dance steps to access the thread in my Rockette kick line of ignores.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
I do get where you're coming from. I disagree on community spread being low for not needing it. Do you think once community spread is low that SeaWorld will drop their proof of vaccine? Or the Bills in Buffalo doing the same?
JD80
Premium Member
You have a published study or something I can refer to based on your research?
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
Masking + distancing + vaccinations are IMPORTANT.
I have a friend who CANNOT be vaccinated because she has a severe immune disorder that almost killed her when she was a teenager. She hasn't gone anywhere but her own home since LAST MARCH. Her husband owns a garage. The wife of one of his employees is flagrantly anti-mask, anti-distancing, and anti-vaccine. The wife contracted COVID. Gave it to her husband...who gave it to his boss, the owner. The owner unknowingly brought it home and now my friend has it. Despite all her efforts to do the smart thing and staying home (she literally hasn't even gone to the grocery store and has used strictly delivery services), she STILL contracted COVID because of a self-centered, ignorant, word-I-can't-say who refused to do anything but what her selfish self wanted to do.
PLEASE. So we can all be done with this...MASK, DISTANCE, and get VACCINATED unless you medically are unable.
ETA: The emotional toll staying home has taken on her has been horrible...now she has to deal with having COVID, too.
I have a friend who CANNOT be vaccinated because she has a severe immune disorder that almost killed her when she was a teenager. She hasn't gone anywhere but her own home since LAST MARCH. Her husband owns a garage. The wife of one of his employees is flagrantly anti-mask, anti-distancing, and anti-vaccine. The wife contracted COVID. Gave it to her husband...who gave it to his boss, the owner. The owner unknowingly brought it home and now my friend has it. Despite all her efforts to do the smart thing and staying home (she literally hasn't even gone to the grocery store and has used strictly delivery services), she STILL contracted COVID because of a self-centered, ignorant, word-I-can't-say who refused to do anything but what her selfish self wanted to do.
PLEASE. So we can all be done with this...MASK, DISTANCE, and get VACCINATED unless you medically are unable.
ETA: The emotional toll staying home has taken on her has been horrible...now she has to deal with having COVID, too.
Last edited:
Flugell
Well-Known Member
I believe that you are fundamentally incorrect in your statement that not everyone wants “this thing” to go away. I do believe that the conflict between opinions is that people disagree as to when we should declare that it has gone!
Many, including myself, want everything to return to normal as quickly as possible but also as safely as possible. We are fed up with people who want things to be lifted immediately while cases, spread and deaths remain at their current level, especially in the USA.
The crux of the problem is agreeing when that will be! 0 cases/deaths per day, brilliant but probably impossible in such a large and varied country. 10 still excellent but again unlikely achievable. 100 daily cases/ deaths- more achievable but probably still too low for the majority to agree to.
The latest figure (according to Google) is that 752 people died on 20th April in the USA. That still amounts to 274,480 deaths per year. In my opinion that is too many to be acceptable. 250 deaths per day works out at 91,250 per year. Still a lot but maybe acceptable to most. (Can’t believe I’ve just written that
)So yes there is a way to go and hopefully people will persevere to bring the death rate down even further. If it takes one extra month to go from 500 deaths to 250, saving an additional 91,250 lives then surely that is worth it?
If it takes a month beyond that to halve it again then that would also be acceptable to me but I guess not everyone.
People who are giving the impression that they don’t want it to ever end are assuming, I think, that they need to give that impression to stop restrictions being lifted too soon (in their opinion.)
Surely no one wants to take the risk of lifting restrictions too soon and risking another rise in cases- but who knows what level that is? That is why many people would prefer to err on the side of caution and inadvertently give the impression that they want the mitigations to remain around for ever. Let’s hope that whenever that happens we can look back and agree it was the right time.
Watch out, the Flu and heart disease monsters that were born 3000 pages ago will rear their heads again. I would quote the posts but you'll just have to take my word for it.I believe that you are fundamentally incorrect in your statement that not everyone wants “this thing” to go away. I do believe that the conflict between opinions is that people disagree as to when we should declare that it has gone!
Many, including myself, want everything to return to normal as quickly as possible but also as safely as possible. We are fed up with people who want things to be lifted immediately while cases, spread and deaths remain at their current level, especially in the USA.
The crux of the problem is agreeing when that will be! 0 cases/deaths per day, brilliant but probably impossible in such a large and varied country. 10 still excellent but again unlikely achievable. 100 daily cases/ deaths- more achievable but probably still too low for the majority to agree to.
The latest figure (according to Google) is that 752 people died on 20th April in the USA. That still amounts to 274,480 deaths per year. In my opinion that is too many to be acceptable. 250 deaths per day works out at 91,250 per year. Still a lot but maybe acceptable to most. (Can’t believe I’ve just written that
So yes there is a way to go and hopefully people will persevere to bring the death rate down even further. If it takes one extra month to go from 500 deaths to 250, saving an additional 91,250 lives then surely that is worth it?
If it takes a month beyond that to halve it again then that would also be acceptable to me but I guess not everyone.
People who are giving the impression that they don’t want it to ever end are assuming, I think, that they need to give that impression to stop restrictions being lifted too soon (in their opinion.)
Surely no one wants to take the risk of lifting restrictions too soon and risking another rise in cases- but who knows what level that is? That is why many people would prefer to err on the side of caution and inadvertently give the impression that they want the mitigations to remain around for ever. Let’s hope that whenever that happens we can look back and agree it was the right time.
DisneyCane
Well-Known Member
Do you mean cannot be vaccinated as in the vaccine won't work on her or cannot because the vaccine will cause her to have a severe reaction?
Tom P.
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I don't want to get into another mask debate in this thread, because those inevitably go nowhere. I was stating an opinion based on my own reading of various studies and statistics, but that wasn't the point of my statement. The point was that I think, regardless of where you fall on the "are masks effective" question, that people should respect the rules and wear them where required without making an issue of it. And that we should be touting vaccines as the way to get rid of them to get buy-in from people who hate them.
Flugell
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the warning! However these are most likely ADDITIONAL deaths so I’ll stick to my guns!
Kevin_W
Well-Known Member
Speaking of the flu, we haven't seen this chart in a while. Thankfully, it hasn't changed. As we're at the end of flu season, 1 pediatric death this year in the US.
Oh, please do. But again, no matter how much you know which way the wind's a blowin' you may get more hot air here than you bargained for.
Heppenheimer
Well-Known Member
I've accidentally ignored you a few times (no offense, slip of the fingers) and the thread then disappears from the forum. But I think that's because you started the thread.
None taken whatsoever. If it gives people one less headache (or ten) a day, I'm all for it.
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
She is medically unable to get the vaccine. It could be very dangerous for her. She can't get vaccinated for the flu, pneumonia, or anything else, either.
If it makes you feel better, in my earlier posts asking what levels people considered acceptable, I called someone with the value 150 daily/55K yearly a monster. That person was me. I still think that's the likely level policy decides is acceptable and I still feel like a monster for just accepting it.The latest figure (according to Google) is that 752 people died on 20th April in the USA. That still amounts to 274,480 deaths per year. In my opinion that is too many to be acceptable. 250 deaths per day works out at 91,250 per year. Still a lot but maybe acceptable to most. (Can’t believe I’ve just written that
The few responses I got from people were mostly in the range between 275/100K and 28/10K. There was one that said the number doesn't matter only vaccine availability even if it was thousands daily. There was one that would like something under 4/1,500. Beyond that, the vast majority hide behind they're not responsible for deciding what's acceptable, but they want normality now. I assume that last group is fine with 750/270K or higher, since that was yesterday.
The value of deaths and other long term impacts we collectively decide is acceptable isn't a medical question. It's a policy one. The epidemiologists aren't going to give us a value. They'll just advise the policy team on what actions will move the metrics up or down. Businesses, like WDW, may take more conservative approaches than general policy if they think its better for business. Or, they may not, if they think that's better.
Heppenheimer
Well-Known Member
Fortunately, most of those are long since gone, along with the "they actually died of something besides COVID" conspiracy theorists.
- Status