Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Based on my own purely anecdotal and completely informal survey, I would say more than half of people up here, when out and about in stores or other indoor locations, have returned to wearing masks voluntarily. There was a brief period after they relaxed restrictions whem very few people masked, but that ended by the end of August as news of the delta variant spread (if not the actual virus yet).

Technically, anyone not vaccinated is still required to wear a mask, but I notice that most people not wearing masks are young adults, who have the worst vaccination rate amongst those eligible. So, the honor system probably isn't particularly effective here either.

In my clinic, we had about a month where staff didn't need to wear masks when patients weren't in the immediate area, but we're back to universal masking except when eating or alone.

I've always found it infuriating that the people who scream the loudest about how "mitigations don't work" also tend to be the ones who proudly refused to follow those mitigation rules from the very beginning. Instead of the lightbulb turning on and letting them realize that their behavior is contributing to this mess, they just point at numbers without context to "prove" that masks are ineffective and then argue that masks not being 100% effective (nobody ever claimed they were) somehow is the same thing as "masks are 0% effective." I've known people like that and they're never actually interested in learning anything new about the subject. They just want an echo chamber of like-minded friends/family to tell them how right they are and ignore anything that disproves any false information they share. One in particular spent all of Florida's low point in cases touting how much smarter DeSantis (and himself by proxy for agreeing with him) was than those of us trying to limit our exposure to and potential transmission of the virus. Conveniently enough, once it became obvious that FL was in the midst of its biggest spike yet, he decided to announce that he was done posting political messages on his social media.
 

hopemax

Well-Known Member
Optimism doesn’t serve a purpose if it results in people being unable to handle the reality of a situation that doesn’t have a positive outcome. Look where we are because people bought into the potential for the best case outcomes? EpiTwitter is not a fan of Dr. Ghandi’s takes. They did see Delta was a possibility. One of the natural results of uncontrolled community spread. Delta’s offense scored higher than most people would have bet on. But that that kind of team could take the field? They at least believed in the possibility. But you never know which variant has Tom Brady at QB.
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
Too early to tell if this is going to be a dead-end or promising lead, but it is interesting:


Any treatment aimed at the nasal mucosa could be a potential game-changer. As effective as the vaccines are in protecting the lungs, the antibodies induced by them can't penetrate the nasal mucosa nearly as well, So, the ability to deny the virus its initial temporary safe haven in the body could cut vastly cut down on the rate of asymptomatic spread. But of course, that would require robust contract tracing, something we haven't been particularly good at thus far.

Maybe get a little nasal spray as you enter the Magic Kingdom queue?
 

StarWarsGirl

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
It's interesting that "take an unpaid leave of absence" is a valid accommodation. It's not technically being fired, but it's not like still working either.

On the religious belief employer pushback, there's been at least one company in the news with this. They're questioning the basis of how and why religious belief applies to the COVID vaccine. Then, having employees sign an affidavit that they do not use any other medication or product that has the same underlying condition. Presumably if you don't want the COVID vaccine because of XYZ, you should have the same reaction to every other thing that also has XYZ. I would assume they can revoke the exemption or just fire you if you break the affidavit later then, since it must not really be a strongly held belief.
I delayed getting vaccinated for medical reasons (long story) and as someone who was in that situation, if I hadn't been able to work from home, I'd have been looking for another job if I came into contact with that many people. Should be a very small percentage of people, but yeah, totally would not want to be in contact with that many people if I still couldn't get vaccinated.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
I delayed getting vaccinated for medical reasons (long story) and as someone who was in that situation, if I hadn't been able to work from home, I'd have been looking for another job if I came into contact with that many people. Should be a very small percentage of people, but yeah, totally would not want to be in contact with that many people if I still couldn't get vaccinated.
Legit medical exemptions are totally fine. It's the rest of us that need to protect those, like you and the other representative posters here.

Fake exemptions of any type, harm everyone and make it harder for those who really need exemptions. If people were not so horrible in general, none of the checking and pushback would be needed since all the reasons would be legit and few.

I remember your story, and the anxiety of when you went and got vaccinated anyway taking the extra risk without all the extra precautions. I'll admit, I felt a sigh of relief when I saw new posts from you in the days following. Since that meant things all worked out.
 

mattpeto

Well-Known Member
Optimism doesn’t serve a purpose if it results in people being unable to handle the reality of a situation that doesn’t have a positive outcome. Look where we are because people bought into the potential for the best case outcomes? EpiTwitter is not a fan of Dr. Ghandi’s takes. They did see Delta was a possibility. One of the natural results of uncontrolled community spread. Delta’s offense scored higher than most people would have bet on. But that that kind of team could take the field? They at least believed in the possibility. But you never know which variant has Tom Brady at QB.
It's fair point, but I do hope she's right.
 

dreday3

Well-Known Member
In a matter of months, viral circulation in the United States could dwindle to levels so low we will no longer need to require masks, distancing, ventilation, asymptomatic testing or contact tracing. This has already happened in Denmark, Ireland, Chile and Britain.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/21/covid-pandemic-end/

I'm a huge Dr. Monica Gandhi fan and love her optimism. Obviously she didn't see Delta coming like it did (or none of us), but she's been a good voice of reason throughout.

This part of the article is so important. And I think it's something people are getting stuck on - there can still be cases, but if in the future they don't result in increased hospitalizations and deaths, we are going to be okay!

This has already happened in Denmark, Ireland, Chile and Britain. These countries have higher vaccination rates than the United States, but we will be helped along by vaccination mandates, immunizations for young children that are on the horizon and by a high level of natural immunity caused by the rapidly spreading delta variant. Like those other countries, we will learn to accept the circulation of a virus that is no longer causing a high number of hospitalizations and treat its symptoms as they arise, like we do so many other communicable diseases that can’t be eradicated.
 

corsairk09

Well-Known Member
You're literally worrying about something that hasn't even happened yet.

Instead of focusing on what might happen and things we don't know, how about focusing on what we do know? For instance, that getting vaccines mitigates the risk of severe illness and that the quicker we get the rest of the population vaccinated, the quicker things can go back to normal.
To be fair to @DisneyCane ...... I do think that he is questioning whether or not things will go back to normal if there is still community spread with extremely high vaccination rates. You assume everyone knows that it will happen, but 8 months ago things were going to be normal by July 4th. We were wrong.

I think it is extremely reasonable to ask "If community spread is high, and vaccination rate is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?

Personally I don't find that political.... just a result of very few answers or any endgame plan on the part of the medical and political leaders.

Maybe people who are asking questions aren't evil......

Maybe they just want to have answers so they can understand the risks and live their lives accordingly.
 

StarWarsGirl

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Legit medical exemptions are totally fine. It's the rest of us that need to protect those, like you and the other representative posters here.

Fake exemptions of any type, harm everyone and make it harder for those who really need exemptions. If people were not so horrible in general, none of the checking and pushback would be needed since all the reasons would be legit and few.

I remember your story, and the anxiety of when you went and got vaccinated anyway taking the extra risk without all the extra precautions. I'll admit, I felt a sigh of relief when I saw new posts from you in the days following. Since that meant things all worked out.
Yeah, second shot is on Saturday, so we get to repeat the anxiety, though hopefully not to the same degree.

That's my main criticism of the vaccine rollout; not enough effort put into people with previous allergic reactions to vaccines to ensure they could get this one safely. Normally, if I wanted to get a vaccine other than the flu shot, I would get it at my allergist's office, get the skin test done, and then assuming the skin test is fine, then I'd get the shot with monitoring. For this one, not only was that not an option, but all of the hospital clinics (minus Hopkins near me, which only has Pfizer and J&J, which my allergist said not to get) shut down.

I'm all for vaccines, which I've been very clear about, but we need to have the resources to get as many people possible vaccinated.

I saw a story online about a woman who was in the same boat as me. She was concerned about an allergic reaction, was doing my her research about how to safely get it...and picked it up and died. It hit so close to home because dang, that could have been me. And then there were a lot of heartless people in the comments saying "well, should have gotten the shot". No, not that simple.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
People accuse me of cherry picking:

"Conclusion
SARS-CoV-2 is evolving toward more efficient aerosol generation and loose-fitting masks provide significant but only modest source control. Therefore, until vaccination rates are very high, continued layered controls and tight-fitting masks and respirators will be necessary."

I wasn't cherry picking anything, I provided the numbers stated in the study, not the vague statements in the conclusion. Use those numbers as you wish.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
To be fair to @DisneyCane ...... I do think that he is questioning whether or not things will go back to normal if there is still community spread with extremely high vaccination rates. You assume everyone knows that it will happen, but 8 months ago things were going to be normal by July 4th. We were wrong.

I think it is extremely reasonable to ask "If community spread is high, and vaccination rate is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?

Personally I don't find that political.... just a result of very few answers or any endgame plan on the part of the medical and political leaders.

Maybe people who are asking questions aren't evil......

Maybe they just want to have answers so they can understand the risks and live their lives accordingly.
All of these questions assume that once vaccination rate is high, that there will still be high community spread. To accept that scenario, we have to assume that vaccination doesn't reduce community spread. We know that's not true. We just haven't gotten the vaccination rate high enough to cause the community wide reduction. It's caused lots of localized reductions.

The question "If community spread is high, and vaccination rate is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?" can be restated just as validly as simply "If community spread is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?". Vaccination is just one type of mitigation, a super effective one. And, the answer is "No, it's not safe to drop mitigation if community spread is high." The active mitigations in an area are directly tied to the to the level of community spread in an area. More spread, more mitigation required. Less spread, less mitigation required. This has been a consistent message the entire time.

Valid question would be things like "How high is high enough that we see reduced spread?". With the original strain, they thought it would be 70% of population. With Delta, it's higher. I haven't seen any good suggestions for exactly how much higher. Lots of suggestions that we'll never get to whatever higher level is required. Questions like "What policies would get us to reduced spread?", "What actions will shorter the duration and which will lengthen how long until we're at the end".

There's lots of good questions that can be asked. Lots of things that can shorter or extend the duration.

If you assume we'll never get enough vaccinated to truly reduce community spread, yet you want to stop doing mitigation measures, means you're really asking: Can we just ditch mitigations and let it rip through the unvaccinated and whatever spillover that causes in the vaccinated? Plus the increased risk of this huge spread allowing a mutation that makes the vaccine useless and dooms us all to start over?

Most people don't want to start over. What we've seen is that the people who want the mitigations to end the most also seem to be the people taking actions that don't reduce community spread and hence cause the mitigations to be required longer. It's a strange thing that those that want it over the most are the very ones dragging it out. It's like little kid that doesn't want to bath throwing a fit that just means it'll be longer until the bath is done.


Side note: This is why I have consistently hated all the different ways we report on the percent vaccinated in the news. If it's One Dose, or of age 12 plus, or of who it's available to. The only stat that has ever mattered, and the one we should use to compare any area is "% of Total Population", preferably "Fully Vaccinated" although I'll accept that "At least One Dose" gives some future direction. Assuming Fully Vaccinated is catching up after 4 weeks. All the other subsets are just ways to make ourselves feel better that we're closer to ending than we really are. The % over 65 was useful when we first started and were worried about the most at risk, but it's rather useless for getting to the end.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
To be fair to @DisneyCane ...... I do think that he is questioning whether or not things will go back to normal if there is still community spread with extremely high vaccination rates. You assume everyone knows that it will happen, but 8 months ago things were going to be normal by July 4th. We were wrong.

I think it is extremely reasonable to ask "If community spread is high, and vaccination rate is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?

Personally I don't find that political.... just a result of very few answers or any endgame plan on the part of the medical and political leaders.

Maybe people who are asking questions aren't evil......

Maybe they just want to have answers so they can understand the risks and live their lives accordingly.
I think the problem is everyone wants answers, everyone wants a definitive plan and everyone wants to know a date when the pandemic ends and when life goes back to normal. Reality is we just don’t know any of that. The best plan we have today is to vaccinate as many people as possible and see if that results in a drop in cases but in the meantime we continue a level of mitigations necessary to attempt to control spread and reduce hospitalizations and death. So it’s not “evil” to ask questions but people need to understand that nobody has a definitive answer either and not having a definitive answer isn’t a reason to give up and just “live with the virus” today.

If vaccination rates are high but community spread is still high can we drop mitigations anyway? the answer is probably not. As long as community spread remains high we will continue to see some forms of mitigation. The Spanish flu pandemic took 3 years to run its course without any vaccines, but we were hoping that vaccines could shorten the timeline and it looks like that’s still a viable possibility. Remember that its not black and white and there are levels of spread and levels of mitigation as a result. The spread and the mitigations are not linear. It’s possible they continue to ramp up and down.

We do know that measles is still about twice as contagious as delta covid and the measles vaccine does not have 100% efficacy but measles is still eliminated in the US despite not having 100% of the population vaccinated. So based on that if we can keep the covid vaccines in the 85%+ level for efficacy (maybe need boosters to keep it there) and if we get 90%+ of Americans vaccinated then there’s no reason the vaccines wouldn’t be as successful or more than the measles vaccine. It just takes time to get everyone vaccinated. That assumes we don’t get a variant that either resists the vaccine or makes the virus more contagious than even measles.

Your comment about being wrong about being done by July 4th is valid, however that’s because the virus changed and became twice as contagious as the previous version. It’s a big math problem. You have to factor in
  1. How contagious the virus is
  2. How effective the vaccine is against the virus
  3. How many people take the vaccine
We control #3 completely, the virus controls #1 and #2 is a split since it is possible to re-design the vaccine if needed. So without delta it’s possible we would have reached a level of vaccination where community spread was low enough that most mitigations would have gone away by July 4th and not returned. The point is that we can reach a point where enough people are vaccinated to significantly reduce community spread and eventually eliminate the virus altogether based on the math.
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
I think the problem is everyone wants answers, everyone wants a definitive plan and everyone wants to know a date when the pandemic ends and when life goes back to normal. Reality is we just don’t know any of that. The best plan we have today is to vaccinate as many people as possible and see if that results in a drop in cases but in the meantime we continue a level of mitigations necessary to attempt to control spread and reduce hospitalizations and death. So it’s not “evil” to ask questions but people need to understand that nobody has a definitive answer either and not having a definitive answer isn’t a reason to give up and just “live with the virus” today.

If vaccination rates are high but community spread is still high can we drop mitigations anyway? the answer is probably not. As long as community spread remains high we will continue to see some forms of mitigation. The Spanish flu pandemic took 3 years to run its course without any vaccines, but we were hoping that vaccines could shorten the timeline and it looks like that’s still a viable possibility. Remember that its not black and white and there are levels of spread and levels of mitigation as a result. The spread and the mitigations are not linear. It’s possible they continue to ramp up and down.

We do know that measles is still about twice as contagious as delta covid and the measles vaccine does not have 100% efficacy but measles is still eliminated in the US despite not having 100% of the population vaccinated. So based on that if we can keep the covid vaccines in the 85%+ level for efficacy (maybe need boosters to keep it there) and if we get 90%+ of Americans vaccinated then there’s no reason the vaccines wouldn’t be as successful or more than the measles vaccine. It just takes time to get everyone vaccinated. That assumes we don’t get a variant that either resists the vaccine or makes the virus more contagious than even measles.

Your comment about being wrong about being done by July 4th is valid, however that’s because the virus changed and became twice as contagious as the previous version. It’s a big math problem. You have to factor in
  1. How contagious the virus is
  2. How effective the vaccine is against the virus
  3. How many people take the vaccine
We control #3 completely, the virus controls #1 and #2 is a split since it is possible to re-design the vaccine if needed. So without delta it’s possible we would have reached a level of vaccination where community spread was low enough that most mitigations would have gone away by July 4th and not returned. The point is that we can reach a point where enough people are vaccinated to significantly reduce community spread and eventually eliminate the virus altogether based on the math.
It’s really simple, we need immunity. What’s immunity? It’s the production of memory b and T cells in your body to prevent you from getting a severe infection. For Delta it is believed that 95% of the population needs to become immune, that’s the total population not eligible population. How do you get immune? 2 options: get the vaccine or get a severe enough version of the illness (evidence exists mild infections do not produce lasting immunity.). That’s it. You either let people get infected and deal with the pain and suffering, or you vaccinate them.

Florida, much like Missouri is on a downward trend because they likely achieved that high bar already, other places have not. How bad your wave is will depend on how well you vaccinated.

It’s really not all that difficult.
 

DCBaker

Premium Member
"Florida on Wednesday reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 10,073 more COVID-19 cases and three deaths, according to Miami Herald calculations of CDC data.

In all, Florida has recorded at least 3,527,250 confirmed COVID cases and 51,892 deaths since the pandemic began.

In the past seven days, on average, the state has added 376 deaths and 9,020 cases per day, according to Herald calculations of CDC data. The state’s seven-day death average has held at 376 deaths per day over the last three days, Florida’s highest seven-day death average."

"There were 8,187 people hospitalized for COVID-19 in Florida, according to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Wednesday report. This data is reported from 236 Florida hospitals. That is 251 fewer patients than Tuesday’s report, but also from two more reporting hospitals than the previous 234.

COVID-19 patients occupy 14.99% of all inpatient beds in the latest report’s hospitals, compared with 15.76% in the previous day’s reporting hospitals.

Of the people hospitalized in Florida, 2,128 people were in intensive care unit beds, a decrease of 78. That represents about 32.84% of the state’s ICU hospital beds compared with 34.21% the previous day."

 

corsairk09

Well-Known Member
All of these questions assume that once vaccination rate is high, that there will still be high community spread. To accept that scenario, we have to assume that vaccination doesn't reduce community spread. We know that's not true. We just haven't gotten the vaccination rate high enough to cause the community wide reduction. It's caused lots of localized reductions.

The question "If community spread is high, and vaccination rate is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?" can be restated just as validly as simply "If community spread is high, is it safe to drop mitigation?". Vaccination is just one type of mitigation, a super effective one. And, the answer is "No, it's not safe to drop mitigation if community spread is high." The active mitigations in an area are directly tied to the to the level of community spread in an area. More spread, more mitigation required. Less spread, less mitigation required. This has been a consistent message the entire time.

Valid question would be things like "How high is high enough that we see reduced spread?". With the original strain, they thought it would be 70% of population. With Delta, it's higher. I haven't seen any good suggestions for exactly how much higher. Lots of suggestions that we'll never get to whatever higher level is required. Questions like "What policies would get us to reduced spread?", "What actions will shorter the duration and which will lengthen how long until we're at the end".

There's lots of good questions that can be asked. Lots of things that can shorter or extend the duration.

If you assume we'll never get enough vaccinated to truly reduce community spread, yet you want to stop doing mitigation measures, means you're really asking: Can we just ditch mitigations and let it rip through the unvaccinated and whatever spillover that causes in the vaccinated? Plus the increased risk of this huge spread allowing a mutation that makes the vaccine useless and dooms us all to start over?

Most people don't want to start over. What we've seen is that the people who want the mitigations to end the most also seem to be the people taking actions that don't reduce community spread and hence cause the mitigations to be required longer. It's a strange thing that those that want it over the most are the very ones dragging it out. It's like little kid that doesn't want to bath throwing a fit that just means it'll be longer until the bath is done.


Side note: This is why I have consistently hated all the different ways we report on the percent vaccinated in the news. If it's One Dose, or of age 12 plus, or of who it's available to. The only stat that has ever mattered, and the one we should use to compare any area is "% of Total Population", preferably "Fully Vaccinated" although I'll accept that "At least One Dose" gives some future direction. Assuming Fully Vaccinated is catching up after 4 weeks. All the other subsets are just ways to make ourselves feel better that we're closer to ending than we really are. The % over 65 was useful when we first started and were worried about the most at risk, but it's rather useless for getting to the end.
OK
1. I am vaccinated. SUPER Pro-vaccine. Have no idea why someone WOULDN'T get the vaccine.
2. The attached article highlights just how effective the vaccine is against severe infection WHICH WAS THE PROMISE MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
3. However you said that we "know" that there isn't community spread with high vaccinate rates. THis is an example where that didn't pan out. Now..... MAYBE there is a perfectly logical reason for that. I am no expert.
4. But to say that we shouldn't be able to ask questions.... that's just wrong.

 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
It’s really simple, we need immunity. What’s immunity? It’s the production of memory b and T cells in your body to prevent you from getting a severe infection. For Delta it is believed that 95% of the population needs to become immune, that’s the total population not eligible population. How do you get immune? 2 options: get the vaccine or get a severe enough version of the illness (evidence exists mild infections do not produce lasting immunity.). That’s it. You either let people get infected and deal with the pain and suffering, or you vaccinate them.

Florida, much like Missouri is on a downward trend because they likely achieved that high bar already, other places have not. How bad your wave is will depend on how well you vaccinated.

It’s really not all that difficult.
You bring up a valid point I failed to mention. What we really need is immunity and that doesn’t come just from vaccination. I would just prefer to see people get their immunity an easier way.
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
I’m not sure it can be said that that bar has been reached. We saw people make similar proclamations with prior waves only for the next one to be bigger.
Each wave has corresponded to a different varient, FL had its summer wave 2020 which was the wild (Wuhan) type virus, its 2020 winter wave from alpha, which was not as bad due to partial protection from the last wave, and 2021 summer wave from delta. Barring a more infectious varient (and it’s going to get hard to get more infectious from delta) there shouldn’t be another one.
 

jpinkc

Well-Known Member
Each wave has corresponded to a different varient, FL had its summer wave 2020 which was the wild (Wuhan) type virus, its 2020 winter wave from alpha, which was not as bad due to partial protection from the last wave, and 2021 summer wave from delta. Barring a more infectious varient (and it’s going to get hard to get more infectious from delta) there shouldn’t be another one.
We can only hope and pray thats correct!
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
OK
1. I am vaccinated. SUPER Pro-vaccine. Have no idea why someone WOULDN'T get the vaccine.
2. The attached article highlights just how effective the vaccine is against severe infection WHICH WAS THE PROMISE MADE IN THE FIRST PLACE.
3. However you said that we "know" that there isn't community spread with high vaccinate rates. THis is an example where that didn't pan out. Now..... MAYBE there is a perfectly logical reason for that. I am no expert.
4. But to say that we shouldn't be able to ask questions.... that's just wrong.

That article is missing a bunch of stats to know what was really going on. The headline is a good sensational one focused on breakthroughs trying to get clicks.

Assuming I pulled out the numbers correctly. There are 227 prisoners total. Vaccinated 185, unvaccinated 42 for an 81.5% vaccination rate. Then there's a whole bunch of unknown number of stuff with unknown number of vaccination status. Maybe they drive the vaccination rate up, maybe down. It's a prison, so we can probably assume there are relatively close living conditions and generally poor ventilation. Both of which increase risk of spread. The article doesn't say over what time period either. Was this all last week, or over the last 4 months or more of Delta? Maybe the underlying study has more details, I didn't dig in that far.

If we assume the prison staff is vaccinated at exactly the same rate, 81.5%, that would tell us that 81.5% isn't high enough to decrease spread. That the rampant spread occurring in the unvaccinated population along with the reduced spread in the vaccinated population is still able to overwhelm the vaccinated population given whatever timeframe this covered. The vaccine is not a forcefield, wade around in a virus soup long enough and you'll have issues.

If we assume the prison staff is vaccinated at a lower rate than 81.5%, say 62% since that's the Texas over 18 Fully Vaccinated rate in general (I dropped under 18, since they don't normally work at a prison), that would tell us the effective vaccination rate in the prison is somewhere between 81.5% and say 62% depending on how many staff vs prisoners there are. If prison staff are running lower than the public in general, it could be even lower. By now, we're pretty sure everything under 80% and definitely everything under 70% isn't nearly enough to provide protection. They're all before the inflection point.

If we assume the prison staff is some ultra health conscious vaccine fanatics, perhaps they all work for the NFL on weekends and are 100% vaccinated. That would raise the effective vaccination rate in the prison above 81.5%, depending on staff ratio. If it's enough to raise it over 90%, this would truly be a bad sign since we're all hoping that by 90% we're good. Might also not matter, since while they can lower it, the fact they they're not always there probably doesn't help raise the effective rate as well.

The prison staff also transition between the prison community and the general Texas community with a much lower vaccination rate. This dilutes whatever the effective rate in the prison is as new sources of virus are continually introduced. It's possible the prison staff has some vaccine requirement, weekly or daily testing, or some other protocol to avoid bringing in virus and negate this. But, it's Texas, that's not likely.

See, there's a ton of great questions to ask there. Lots of unknowns that would all be super helpful. Notice, none of them were leading questions of "let's just give up, cause it doesn't work". :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom