Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[ImperfectPixie]

Would you have been better served by your OB/Midwife/Doula if they would have offered information during pregnancy on why vaccination is important? Perhaps as part of prenatal care, some type of sit-down with a vaccine counselor type that could spend more than five minutes in an alarming YouTube video explaining why you wouldn't be poisoning your child or inviting Autism or whatever other nonsense argument? Reasonable rebuttals take time, because it takes time to give the pharmacology/vaccinology and infectious disease 101 to make a REAL informed decision. If it would have been offered in, say, late T2 or early T3 would it have made a difference? Would it have been a deal breaker or seemed overly aggressive if your provider or birth center of choice wouldn't deliver without completion of a course or counseling? There is so much going through a new parent's head, I wonder if this was a more aggressive part of pregnancy care we might be able to shut some of this anti-vax rhetoric down before it can get it's claws into a new family.

Absolutely. And I think any counseling needs to address the anti-vaxx movement with soon-to-be moms in a non-snarky and educational manner, so that when facing it as a new mom, women are prepared. (Seriously...it's bad. It's like they wait in the groups for someone to ask a question about vaccines. So bad that some mom and autism groups have made the topic off-limits.)

 

[Tom P.]

West Virginia Governor Jim Justice just announced June 20th as the end of the mask mandate in the state. They are projecting that 65% of West Virginians ages 12 and older will have received at least their first dose of the vaccine.

(Edited to clarify that it's 65% who will have received at least their first dose.)

 

[DisneyFan32]

PA will drop mask mandate when 70% of adults receive the vaccine. We are at 64% of adults with 1 shot currently. Should be several more weeks to get to 70% with 1 shot and then 3-4 weeks after for second shots. Probably second half of June. Just because the mask mandate is dropped statewide doesn’t mean all businesses will drop their mandates and the local governments (especially Philly and Pittsburgh) can still keep their own rules. It’s coming. Not long now.

Can Six Flags will end mask mandate for the parks than Disney does?

 

[GoofGoof]

Pfizer has initiated the process of applying to the FDA for full approval of the Covid vaccine. It may still be another month before that is granted, but it’s possible before the end of May. In recent polling 15% of people are still saying they will wait and see before getting vaccinated and some listed the emergency use authorization as a contributing factor. So maybe we see some of those people going in and gettin the vaccine. That would be good for the country and for those people.

This will also open the door for vaccine mandates from employers as well as possible vaccine passports. Most companies did not want to mandate a vaccine under EUA but that obstacle will be gone as soon as a month from now.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Can Six Flags will end mask mandate for the parks than Disney does?

I don't know, but I imagine Disney might be the slower of the two.

 

[DisneyFan32]

By late August or September, NJ and NY may lose masks soon.

 

[GoofGoof]

Can Six Flags will end mask mandate for the parks than Disney does?

Right now neither can end mask mandates. NJ hasn’t dropped the mask mandate yet so Great Adventure is still required to have masks. While FL has no mask mandate for the state, Orange County still does so Disney can’t drop masks yet even if they wanted to. Great Adventure is mostly outdoors and much more regional of a park so my gut says much more likely to drop masks sooner than WDW and likely as soon as they are allowed by the NJ government. Disney may take longer to decide and be less dependent on the government restrictions.

 

[danlb_2000]

Right now neither can end mask mandates. NJ hasn’t dropped the mask mandate yet so Great Adventure is still required to have masks. While FL has no mask mandate for the state, Orange County still does so Disney can’t drop masks yet even if they wanted to. Great Adventure is mostly outdoors and much more regional of a park so my gut says much more likely to drop masks sooner than WDW and likely as soon as they are allowed by the NJ government. Disney may take longer to decide and be less dependent on the government restrictions.

So is Orange County technically in violation of the Governor's most recent executive order on local mandates?

 

[DisneyFan32]

Right now neither can end mask mandates. NJ hasn’t dropped the mask mandate yet so Great Adventure is still required to have masks. While FL has no mask mandate for the state, Orange County still does so Disney can’t drop masks yet even if they wanted to. Great Adventure is mostly outdoors and much more regional of a park so my gut says much more likely to drop masks sooner than WDW and likely as soon as they are allowed by the NJ government. Disney may take longer to decide and be less dependent on the government restrictions.

I expect NY and NJ will start losing masks by soon as late summer when the cases are low enough.

 

[GimpYancIent]

Hopefully some states like NJ, NY, CT, PA, etc will start losing masks very soon maybe by late summer/early fall... WDW/DCL will may lose masks by end of the year or 2022.

Maybe NJ and NY will may lose masks for good by end of August or September.

Or maybe never!

 

[Chi84]

So is Orange County technically in violation of the Governor's most recent executive order on local mandates?

When does the order take effect?

 

[sullyinMT]

So is Orange County technically in violation of the Governor's most recent executive order on local mandates?

Based on Demings’ response, I’m not so sure he cares. And good on him for it - his targets are reasonable and the vaccination rate has continued to tick up in the county after that presser that announced the goals.

 

[Jenny72]

The problem, as many have noted, is that "no one knows who to believe" and "there's nowhere to get unbiased news." This means that Uncle Phil on Facebook has as much credibility (or more) than MD/PhDs. People use the term 'research' for things that I would never have called research (having actually been involved in data collection and analysis). To me, I'd say you've read some other people's research and/or opinions off of Google. This word has become so watered down.

And because you can find 5 sites telling you one thing and 5 telling you the opposite, people throw up their hands and decide that no one knows. The fact is, people *do* know, inasmuch as is humanly possible. Those who wish to sow discord know that you don't have to convince people of lies; you only need to throw a lot of doubt and questions out there, and that's enough to make people feel that there's no real truth. (But we're only asking questions....!)

It's really not true that there are no facts and no places to find information. I get very frustrated when people say this. I think what it really means is that they don't believe the information given by experts. That is something different.

 

[DisneyFan32]

I wish Disney could speed up as they will remove masks soon by end of the year.

 

[JAKECOTCenter]

Summer will definitely be a transition to post-pandemic normal. June will be what it is now but July will probably be gradually phasing remaining restrictions and August will be probably be as close to February 2019 as it'll get

 

[CaptainAmerica]

The problem, as many have noted, is that "no one knows who to believe" and "there's nowhere to get unbiased news." This means that Uncle Phil on Facebook has as much credibility (or more) than MD/PhDs. People use the term 'research' for things that I would never have called research (having actually been involved in data collection and analysis). To me, I'd say you've read some other people's research and/or opinions off of Google. This word has become so watered down.

And because you can find 5 sites telling you one thing and 5 telling you the opposite, people throw up their hands and decide that no one knows. The fact is, people *do* know, inasmuch as is humanly possible. Those who wish to sow discord know that you don't have to convince people of lies; you only need to throw a lot of doubt and questions out there, and that's enough to make people feel that there's no real truth. (But we're only asking questions....!)

It's really not true that there are no facts and no places to find information. I get very frustrated when people say this. I think what it really means is that they don't believe the information given by experts. That is something different.

You're conflating two different things.

Facts are facts, but facts don't tell us how we ought to behave.

Fact: On average, there are 6 million car crashes in the United States per year.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is too dangerous to be worth the risk. We should ban cars.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is extremely convenient, even with the risk. We should allow cars but mandate seatbelts.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is extremely convenient and I don't care about the risk. We should allow cars and not mandate seatbelts.

Our problem is that we've outsourced prudential judgments to "health experts" whose expertise is not making prudential judgments. Their expertise is in finding and communicating the facts. When they step outside of their areas of expertise, they destroy their own credibility to the point that people don't trust the *facts* they present, either.

 

[Jenny72]

I think it is a reasonable point that policy is debatable, and I agree with you on that, but that's not what I mean. A lot of people are asking "questions" about facts that can be answered by experts. For instance, one TV pundit throws out questions such as, "What is the efficacy and safety data on these vaccines and why won't they provide that?" It is provided. That is a fact. I'm saying that we don't even agree on the facts, so how can ever reach a policy decision? If we agreed on the factual information, we could have a good faith debate. But Uncle Phil is as reliable a source of facts as experts are. That is a serious problem.

 

[GoofGoof]

The problem, as many have noted, is that "no one knows who to believe" and "there's nowhere to get unbiased news." This means that Uncle Phil on Facebook has as much credibility (or more) than MD/PhDs. People use the term 'research' for things that I would never have called research (having actually been involved in data collection and analysis). To me, I'd say you've read some other people's research and/or opinions off of Google. This word has become so watered down.

And because you can find 5 sites telling you one thing and 5 telling you the opposite, people throw up their hands and decide that no one knows. The fact is, people *do* know, inasmuch as is humanly possible. Those who wish to sow discord know that you don't have to convince people of lies; you only need to throw a lot of doubt and questions out there, and that's enough to make people feel that there's no real truth. (But we're only asking questions....!)

It's really not true that there are no facts and no places to find information. I get very frustrated when people say this. I think what it really means is that they don't believe the information given by experts. That is something different.

I agree. The FDA is not a political body, at least not the career FDA employees who are doing the leg work. In addition the FDA uses an independent board of experts to advise them who are doctors and experts that have years and years of education and experience and are putting their personal and professional reputations on the line when reviewing the EUA application. Those people do know the truth and that should make people feel very comfortable. Doing “research“ online is fine too, but ultimately the true experts are going to be the best source of info. I think in some cases people don’t trust the government and see the FDA as part of the government so don’t trust them either.

There may also be an education discrepancy as well. For someone with multiple degrees it’s pretty easy for me to see someone who has multiple degrees and has worked for years to be an expert in their field and know they are unlikely to throw it all away to be part of some conspiracy with unknown benefits, let alone a whole panel of these experts doing that. It may be harder for some people to relate to that. At the end of the day people don’t have to trust a politician or their neighbor or a friend on Facebook we have real experts giving their opinion. We had 15 people with suspected blood clots from the JnJ vaccine and they paused the whole thing for several weeks. That should give people a lot of confidence in the experts and the FDA or CDC. Even the tiniest hint of a possible problem and they paused.

 

[Tom P.]

You're conflating two different things.

Facts are facts, but facts don't tell us how we ought to behave.

Fact: On average, there are 6 million car crashes in the United States per year.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is too dangerous to be worth the risk. We should ban cars.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is extremely convenient, even with the risk. We should allow cars but mandate seatbelts.

Prudential judgment, not a fact: Driving a car is extremely convenient and I don't care about the risk. We should allow cars and not mandate seatbelts.

Our problem is that we've outsourced prudential judgments to "health experts" whose expertise is not making prudential judgments. Their expertise is in finding and communicating the facts. When they step outside of their areas of expertise, they destroy their own credibility to the point that people don't trust the *facts* they present, either.

This should be required reading before reading anything else.

 

[Tom P.]

We had 15 people with suspected blood clots from the JnJ vaccine and they paused the whole thing for several weeks. That should give people a lot of confidence in the experts and the FDA or CDC. Even the tiniest hint of a possible problem and they paused.

It didn't. It had the exact opposite effect. Confidence in the Johnson & Johnson vaccine plummeted and has not recovered even since the pause was lifted. And that impact has carried over to the other vaccines as well. The pause may have been well-intentioned, even warranted, but it definitely did not help with vaccine hesitancy.