Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
If you are more than 2 or so weeks out, try to stop stressing.
Do you have any data for this? It would be helpful for said stress!



The spread among the unvaccinated has gotten so out of hand
Hmm... how did that happen?
I'm talking about those who flat-out refuse to be vaccinated because they've been duped by people who pretend to know better because they personally gain from misinforming people.
I think that’s a minority of people. It’s easy to paint everyone who questions the vaccine as people who have been “duped” or “science denyers” etc... but most people are just questioning a brand new, “yet to be fully fda approved” vaccine. That makes sense to me.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
Do you have any data for this? It would be helpful for said stress!




Hmm... how did that happen?

I think that’s a minority of people. It’s easy to paint everyone who questions the vaccine as people who have been “duped” or “science denyers” etc... but most people are just questioning a brand new, “yet to be fully fda approved” vaccine. That makes sense to me.
You're misunderstanding me. I'm not talking about people who have genuine questions and are hesitant (I would count you in that group, btw). I'm talking about all the people who have fallen hook, line and sinker for things that are flat-out falsehoods...whether they are anti-vaccine falsehoods, conspiracy theories, or political nonsense.
 

CarolinaSoprano

Active Member
The science for the vaccinated has not changed. The spread among the unvaccinated has gotten so out of hand that short of vaccine passports/requirements, everyone masking is the only option. Since we can't trust the unvaccinated to continue to mask or get their shot, everyone has to mask up again.
Except the same people who didn't wear masks to begin with will continue not to wear one. Couple that now with the vaccinated who will refuse because they did the right thing and will be very angry wearing a mask to protect those who refuse to vaccinate. I don't see how any new mask mandate will do any good. If we had poor mask compliance in certain places before (those places now with low vax rates) it will be ever poorer now. So what good would it do?
 

correcaminos

Well-Known Member
Do you have any data for this? It would be helpful for said stress!




Hmm... how did that happen?

I think that’s a minority of people. It’s easy to paint everyone who questions the vaccine as people who have been “duped” or “science denyers” etc... but most people are just questioning a brand new, “yet to be fully fda approved” vaccine. That makes sense to me.
This one had up to 22 days for one set being observed and 2 weeks for another https://www.healio.com/news/neurolo...nbarre-variants-following-covid19-vaccination
Stating the same but less wonky site for me https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19vaccine/93227

I could list a slew that said within 2 weeks. We'll give 3 on the outside and 42 days would be super cautious.
 

correcaminos

Well-Known Member
The gullible sheep are those that live in fear of a virus that has minimum effect on young health people. The old and those with conditions should get vaccinated and most have-we really need to focus of the minorities to get vaccinated. The percentage of them without vaccinations are the highest in the nation.

Is that who you are condemning or have you done your homework on the topic?
Marginalized. And while we do, they, in terms of over all population aren't the issue. Their rate of vaccination varies. Parts of my state are far worse. We need to reach all.
 

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
The gullible sheep are those that live in fear of a virus that has minimum effect on young health people. The old and those with conditions should get vaccinated and most have-we really need to focus of the minorities to get vaccinated. The percentage of them without vaccinations are the highest in the nation.

Is that who you are condemning or have you done your homework on the topic?
And please stop continuing the falsehood that the young and healthy aren't affected by the virus. I'm sure the healthy 24-year-old who needed a double-lung transplant would take issue with that.
 
Wasn't it a week and a half or so ago that Fauci said there was no change in guidance being considered and that if you are fully vaccinated you are well protected? Don't give me the "that's how science works" line because if he couldn't see the trend and predict where "the numbers" were going two weeks ago then he is incompetent as has no business advising the President.
He should be shown the door. He is just full of himself.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
I didn't say they were "about the same." I was pointing out the increases since 6/1 in multiples of cases. FL started at a higher level on 6/1 so 5x FL is still more cases per 100k than 6x CA. I was speculating that it is within the realm of possibility that this wave reaches the same level in cases per 100k as a peak but FL reaches the peak faster.

The CA numbers illustrate the ridiculousness of the narrative that "if we had just done the right thing last summer everywhere, COVID would have been gone." CA "followed the science" and has had pretty high vaccine acceptance yet cases are still increasing at a pretty high rate.
That’s still equating them. That the CA 69.98/16.89=4.1 and the FL 340.73/59.34=5.7 is somehow an equivalent rate that’s just as bad in CA headed for the same total. CA would need a 20 times increase since June 1 and FL to already be at peak and start dropping now for them to be the same, 340.73/16.89. They may peak on about the same calendar schedule, but if everything else stays constant, the FL peak will be significantly higher.

CA isn’t perfect, but FL is a disaster right now.

Not this post specifically, but lots of posts in general say stuff like “x took y time in it’s cycle” with the implication we can wait it out until y time and it will end the same. But that assumes people do the same stuff that made it take y time. If we just blow it off and assume time is all that’s needed without actions, the time will not be the same.
 

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
And please stop continuing the falsehood that the young and healthy aren't affected by the virus. I'm sure the healthy 24-year-old who needed a double-lung transplant would take issue with that.
Well then I could say “I’m sure that guy who died because of taking the vaccine would take issue with that”
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Well then I could say “I’m sure that guy who died because of taking the vaccine would take issue with that”

 

Trauma

Well-Known Member

You live near me.

What’s your plan if they bring back mandates?

I don’t see anyone masking right now.

If people here are concerned in the least they sure aren’t showing it.
 

carolina_yankee

Well-Known Member
I don't think any church would get into trouble with the government for promoting vaccination..That's actually the kind of thing that the government would smile upon.

Trying to avoid politics in this as much as possible...The more subtle issue is if vaccination would be considered "political" within a church. Some of the more evangelical branches of Protestantism seem to have firmly aligned themselves on a certain side of the politcal aisle, even embracing a certain politician, that to put it lightly, seems to stand for almost everything that Christians should be against. And it is no secret that this certain side of the political aisle is far less enthusiastic about promoting vaccinations than the other. So, in this context, the partisan divide might bleed into the internal workings of the church, so much so that fully embracing and encouraging vaccination might be seen also as a betrayal by joining the "other side" of the political aisle.
This is very misunderstood, especially to someone outside fo the US (and in a country with an official State church headed by the Head of State), so I want to add a couple of things.

Speaking as a “professional,” I think you hav ea good read, but there are some other factors, too. There is such a huge distrust of both government and science among some religious traditions that resistance to vaccines and a political party can seem like natural bedfellows but don’t have to be. Remember, in this country, teaching evolution isn’t without controversy.

Regarding what churches and clergy can and cannot do politically, that is also nuanced and depends on proximity to an election. The so-called Johnson. Amendment provided the changes to the tax code that regulates the non-profit status (and thus tax benefits) of churches. The bottom line is that endorsing a specific candidate from the pulpit close to an Election Day can get one in trouble with the IRS, but voter education in general and clarifying church positions on issues are generally safe. Likewise, personal opinions are, even on church letterhead or a blog, etc., can be safe as long as it is clear that it is I the author’s opinion.

The church and sermon referenced earlier were not out of bounds with the Johnson Amendment, from my read of it. I just want to emphasize that there is a huge divide within Christianity in the US and that some denominations/groups would have very little common cause with others, so no one position can be said to be “representative” of Christianity. My own denomination is extremely pro-vaccination (and also carefully followed all CDC guidance).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom