Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government, or more specifically the Executive Branch, can mandate vaccines? This is why challenges are being heard in the Supreme Court - to clarify both questions.
I think it's less of a constitutional question and more of a legislation/separation of powers question. Basically, has Congress given the authority to the executive branch through laws that have been passed.
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government, or more specifically the Executive Branch, can mandate vaccines? This is why challenges are being heard in the Supreme Court - to clarify both questions.
I think it's less of a constitutional question and more of a legislation/separation of powers question. Basically, has Congress given the authority to the executive branch through laws that have been passed.
Um, we've been doing this for months already? Perhaps you have a different definition of "plow forward".

We're moving forward just fine. Doing things, not everything, but still plenty of things. They've all just been adjusted for the new risk profile.

Going to an enclosed space with random people - wear a mask.
Having people in the house - make sure they're vaccinated.
Traveling to visit people in other areas with different pools of exposure - test first.
Eating in a packed restaurant, close together with random people, with questionable ventilation - not doing, as the risk profile changed. Just like we wouldn't eat at a restaurant with a poor health department rating. Eliminate some of those, and the restaurant may be fine.

It's the new forward. Plowing just fine.

Would it be nice to go back to the summer of 2019 and hang out in a packed bar, shoulder to shoulder drinking and cheering some event with everyone right on top of each other without a care in the world? Maybe, but that's probably just gone forever. It's the new forward.

Month to month, I would like to see the risk profile reduce instead of increase, as then forward can involve less and less thought.
That's your new forward and that's your decision. Other people may wish to return to the summer of 2019 (many who are doing so at some establishments near my home) and that's their decision.
 

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government, or more specifically the Executive Branch, can mandate vaccines? This is why challenges are being heard in the Supreme Court - to clarify both questions.
Nowhere, but not all rights and powers in the US are solely codified in the constitution. There's legislation and case law which also shows rights and powers.

And while there is no precedent for a federal mandate, there are multiple US Supreme Court precedents with state and local governments where the consensus has been that penalties for refusing a vaccine mandates are legal, and that public health goes above individual liberties.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
That's your new forward and that's your decision. Other people may wish to return to the summer of 2019 (many who are doing so at some establishments near my home) and that's their decision.
That's why I asked (and others have asked other posters before too) what people mean by "go forward" or "move on" or "live you life".

One can certainly act like it's summer or 2019 with no care in the world. No mitigations at all. Which for many also means the unvaccinated are acting this way too.

That's an option. I would argue that right now, it's a bad option, but it's an option.

However, doing that has consequences. Doing that would increase community spread and impacts. If that's fine with someone, then it makes sense for them to act that way.

All the conflict comes when someone suggests everyone should act like it's summer 2009, and at the same time we will not have increased community spread and impacts. Mostly they suggest that there would be no economic impacts and no impacts to the vaccinated, and who cares about the rest. Except that's not really true, since the vaccinated impact is a subset of the unvaccinated impact and the economy suffers with increased community spread.

Which gets us back to, what those people mean? Cause, if we don't want some huge impacts, what's going on now IS moving forward. Not just my decision, but the decision that balances those impacts. Alternatively, they just don't care about those impacts. That's what most people are responding to, the implied message of not caring about the impacts of increased community spread because they don't want to do any of things we've had to do since the summer of 2019. Generally, people haven't tried to clear up if this is what they mean or not.

I can want to stay in a Polynesian lake villa. I can make the decision to do that or not to. I cannot stay in a Polynesian lake villa with no impact to my bank account. It's just not an option. If I posted my desire to stay in a Polynesian lake villa with no impact to my bank account, people would ask questions and tell me it's not going to happen.
 

Wendy Pleakley

Well-Known Member
Could it?

Locally, 30% of hospitalizations are made up of fully vaccinated people.

That sounds bad, but it isn't.

90% of adults are fully vaccinated. The hospitalization rates per 100k shows that the chances of being hospitalized is 23.8/100k if unvaccinated, while only 1/100k if vaccinated. This shows an incredibly high rate of protection from hospitalization for the vaccinated.

This is a plague of the unvaccinated and they are the ones driving hospitalizations.

So yes, if more people got vaccinated the health care system wouldn't be overloaded yet again.
 
Last edited:

DisneyFan32

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
Yes
I'd love to just be able to travel internationally without worry of popping positive, asymptomatic, and being stuck in Copenhagen or wherever and worrying about my employment status upon return. First world problems, I know.

I'm hoping, perhaps still naively, that eventually a variant will come along that decouples cases and hospitalization/death to the point where "plow forward" means no mitigation beyond vaccination, because the other societal effects mirror other illness. Of course, something new could rear its head after that occurs, and we could adjust accordingly. But I'd like a period like this past summer that lasts for six months or more and allows for everything to actually drop. Not just bullheaded push ahead, but meaningful change in public health concern. Without more people vaccinated, whether by mandates or finally coming around, I doubt we'll get there soon.

I agree, though, that for daily life, we're largely back to normal enough for all intents and purposes.
We're doomed for years.....thanks variants...ruining my future life....
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member

sullyinMT

Well-Known Member
Locally, 30% of hospitalizations are made up of fully vaccinated people.

That sounds bad, but it isn't.

90% of adults are fully vaccinated. The hospitalization rates per 100k shows that 23.8/100k are unvaccinated, while only 1/100k are vaccinated. This shows an incredibly high rate of protection from hospitalization for the vaccinated.

This is a plague of the unvaccinated and they are the ones driving hospitalizations.

So yes, if more people got vaccinated the health care system wouldn't be overloaded yet again.
My county is currently in a valley between November’s Delta wave and the impending Omicron onslaught. I posted a while back that hospitalizations were 12:1 favoring the vaccinated here. That has held in the days since and now sits and 13:1.

In a county with abysmal vaccination rates (we still haven’t hit 50% fully vaccinated), if even half of the unvaxxed got their 2 shots before Omicron really hit here (not likely), the impact could be blunted to the point that our hospitals could bend and not break. As it stands, even if Omicron comes in less virulent as the SA authorities suggest, the speed at which we will spike will overwhelm our United Health Command (2 systems and the small VA and LTAC facilities available for some overflow).
 

The Mom

Moderator
Premium Member
Nowhere, but not all rights and powers in the US are solely codified in the constitution. There's legislation and case law which also shows rights and powers.

And while there is no precedent for a federal mandate, there are multiple US Supreme Court precedents with state and local governments where the consensus has been that penalties for refusing a vaccine mandates are legal, and that public health goes above individual liberties.
That was sort of my point. There is nothing specifically written either way, which is why it has to be decided by SCOTUS . Which has been the case in many Federal versus State cases.
 

DCBaker

Premium Member
The FDA has issued an EUA for Pfizer's COVID antiviral pill -

"Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for Pfizer’s Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir tablets and ritonavir tablets, co-packaged for oral use) for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older weighing at least 40 kilograms or about 88 pounds) with positive results of direct SARS-CoV-2 testing, and who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, including hospitalization or death. Paxlovid is available by prescription only and should be initiated as soon as possible after diagnosis of COVID-19 and within five days of symptom onset.

“Today’s authorization introduces the first treatment for COVID-19 that is in the form of a pill that is taken orally — a major step forward in the fight against this global pandemic,” said Patrizia Cavazzoni, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “This authorization provides a new tool to combat COVID-19 at a crucial time in the pandemic as new variants emerge and promises to make antiviral treatment more accessible to patients who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19.”

Paxlovid is not authorized for the pre-exposure or post-exposure prevention of COVID-19 or for initiation of treatment in those requiring hospitalization due to severe or critical COVID-19. Paxlovid is not a substitute for vaccination in individuals for whom COVID-19 vaccination and a booster dose are recommended. The FDA has approved one vaccine and authorized others to prevent COVID-19 and serious clinical outcomes associated with a COVID-19 infection, including hospitalization and death. The FDA urges the public to get vaccinated and receive a booster if eligible. Learn more about FDA-approved or -authorized COVID-19 vaccines.

Paxlovid consists of nirmatrelvir, which inhibits a SARS-CoV-2 protein to stop the virus from replicating, and ritonavir, which slows down nirmatrelvir’s breakdown to help it remain in the body for a longer period at higher concentrations. Paxlovid is administered as three tablets (two tablets of nirmatrelvir and one tablet of ritonavir) taken together orally twice daily for five days, for a total of 30 tablets. Paxlovid is not authorized for use for longer than five consecutive days."

More at the link below -

 
Last edited:

carolina_yankee

Well-Known Member
Why hospitalizations will be a concern.

NJ was doing decently this fall. Then we started increasing as the weather cooled. Last week we jumped from around 3000 cases daily to around 6000 daily (the highest sustained +6000 count since the pandemic began). Today we're reporting over 9000 cases.

Hospitalzations one month ago were 875. Today they are 2100. Up 400 from a week ago. And we're just getting started. Peak hospitalizations last year were 3700.

We'll have the beds and ventilators. Question is will we have the staff? And that's 9000 people (TODAY!) who need to be calling gout sick because of COVID (not to mention everyone they live with). Without precautions, disruption happens. It's not policies that are disrupting lives - it's COVID, and the resistance to doing what what we know works to *reduce* (not eliminate) the risk of catching the disease.

Dirk
 

Polkadotdress

Well-Known Member

Somehow a previous administration was able to set up field hospitals, deploy hospital ships etc. Now we can't do it. If this is as bad as everyone seems to think it will be, then we need to figure out how to make it happen.

No goal was every achieved with an intitial mission statement of "We Can't"
I'm not saying it's not possible. However, it's not a solution that is easily implement. And when people just shrug and say "build more temp hospitals", they truly have no idea what goes into that. It's short-sighted thinking so that they can get back to their normal standard of living.

@Touchdown explains it very well here:
They were not effective, because of lack of resources (high flow oxygen, IV pumps, etc.) and lack of staff (seriously the current problem right now is a lack of nursing staff, due to burnout and nursing wages staying flat while minimum wages have risen has caused the current problem) they would not fix the problem.

We need more nurses, they don’t grow on trees and a lot of them left because of how terrible work has been for the past two years. On top of that, healthcare companies are realling from how much money they lost in 2020 and cannot afford to raise wages for their employees at a time when wages are increasing, making those jobs less desirable. Unlike every other aspect of life, Medicare will be cutting reimbursement this year unless Congress acts, and it is highly unlikely that Congress will do anything other then freeze the rates.
And also, many news stories are about how tired and overworked the health care workers in hospitals are right now. A news story from today highlights health care workers in Ohio taking out a full-page newspaper ad simply stating "HELP" because they are so overwhelmed by the unvaxx'd in the hospitals.


Know what another solution is, besides those field hospitals? Mandating vaccinations.
 

DCBaker

Premium Member
As the COVID-19 testing portion of Barnett Park hits capacity for the 8th day in a row, Orange County DOH has announced they are reopening the Econ Soccer Complex for testing beginning Monday, December 27th.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom