Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[Chip Chipperson]

Current bed capacity of my local overwhelmed hospital, 1300 bed capacity, less than 350 are Covid admissions. A majority of the remaining 75% of total capacity is comprised of drug and alcohol related conditions not simply diagnosis.

The majority of non-COVID admissions are for drugs or alcohol? And where did you see that reported?

 

[Patcheslee]

I know someone in the same boat - employer is only paying for time missed due to COVID-19 if vaccinated. This person refuses to get vaccinated, knew the rule was in place, got COVID-19, and then complained about not getting paid while out sick and acted like they had no idea the rule was in place (despite having complained about it weeks before getting sick).

Vaccinated win the privilege to return to work if they aren’t showing symptoms here. We are in manufacturing so it's not a special situation like healthcare. It was working against them for awhile because unvaccinated were able to get more time off.

 

[mmascari]

What do you think you are seeing in the chart? The chart shows that fully vaccinated people are getting infected less then unvaccinated. Yes, the fully vax case rate is higher, but that is because that is a much larger population.

In the Ontario chart, the vaccinated case rate per 100K is 20 points higher than the case rate in unvaccinated and partially vaccinated. The unvaccinated and partially vaccinated are essentially the same.

At 78% of the population is fully vaccinated, it's not that drastically larger that I would expect their rate to be higher. I didn't look up the population of Ontario to see if it's so small that a per 100K number is misleading, but I assume Ontario is plenty large enough.

All other things being equal, I would expect the vaccinated rate to be lower than the other two. That's exactly how every other chart besides Ontario's looks.

Which, since it's an outlier, makes me think something else is going on. That there is something else happening and all other things are not equal. Whatever that thing is, it's probably very interesting. I would love to know why this one sample is different than all the others.

 

[MisterPenguin]

It's case rate per 100k people. The size of the vaccinated population doesn't matter.

If 100% of people got vaccinated, then the only people in the hospital from COVID would be vaccination breakthroughs.

In that case, you would look at the raw numbers and see that 100% of the hospitalized are vaccinated and then declare vaccinations don't work.

Of course, that would be a very stupid fallacious conclusion. Very easy to see just how stupid that would be.


Now, let's say 80% of the population is vaccinated. And there are the same number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital. If vaccinations didn't work, then 80% of the people in the hospital should be the vaccinated and only 20% unvaccinated.

But, that's not what we're seeing. To make the case that because the number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital are the same amount, that therefore, vaccines don't work, would be making that very stupid fallacious argument in the first example.

 

[LittleBuford]

The majority of non-COVID admissions are for drugs or alcohol? And where did you see that reported?

Whether that’s true or not is irrelevant. Even his own numbers tell us that a full quarter of the hospital’s capacity is being taken up by COVID patients. How anyone can deny that that is an impactful number, and certainly enough to stretch resources, is beyond me.

 

[Nubs70]

You don’t consider 350—all for one illness—to be a sizeable chunk of 1300?

Nope, if drug and alcohol related admissions filled 1299 beds of 1300, would the 1 Covid patient be the cause of overwhelmed status?

 

[Nubs70]

The majority of non-COVID admissions are for drugs or alcohol? And where did you see that reported?

From the bed planner I sleep with.

 

[hopemax]

I think it’s further proof of the articles showing most (or at least many) Covid hospitalizations are for reasons other than covid.

If you go in for a twisted ankle and test positive you’re counted as Covid, even though you aren’t in the hospital for Covid. Since most people in Ontario are vaccinated they are just being tested at a much higher rate.

In “highly vaccinated” areas this does seem to be impacting the numbers. But I think we’ve all seen people misuse data. Before it was usually “it’s only young people.” In this case, people are claiming that everywhere it’s just “incidental” Covid. Low and high vaccinated places went through different experiences with Delta and they will with Omicron. Some hospitals are quick to point out that their Covid positive patients are in other wards, indicative of incidental Covid. But there are still plenty of hospitals who are reporting that they are treating people FOR Covid although their care needs are different than before. We should take their reports just as seriously as the hospitals who say it’s just people in maternity and psych.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

“We are pretty much at capacity”

hospital is “managing, but just barely,” at keeping up with the increased number of sick patients in the last three weeks.

“We had to treat patients in places where we normally wouldn’t, like in recovery rooms,”

In California several hospitals have set up large “surge tents”

All quotes from a Times article regarding the 2017/2018 flu season.

The sad reality is our hospitals can barely handle a bad flu season, they had no chance of keeping up with a pandemic. Will we learn and prepare for the next illness? probably not because it costs too much.

That just so happens to have been the deadliest flu season in the past decade+ and is very much an outlier. That flu season saw 7 weeks of excess deaths, according to the CDC. Seven. We're closing in on 2 years of excess deaths every week. The 2017-2018 flu season isn't even in the same league as this.

 

[MisterPenguin]

These stories are disgusting. I'm not referring to the underlying "news," I'm talking about the way the media exploits these deaths because the deceased disagreed with vaccine mandates or didn't want to be vaccinated. They are reported with the "he/she got what they deserved" tone. It's like ESPN (to make this more Disney related) on their bottom line scroll pointing out that Kirk Cousins wasn't vaccinated when he tested positive while they don't point out the dozens of other athletes that tested positive who were vaccinated (including a huge percentage of the NHL and NBA).

How many stories do we see with the headline, "Vaccine Advocate Dies of COVID?" I haven't seen any and it isn't because there are no fully vaccinated and boosted people who advocated for vaccination and/or mandates that have died from COVID.

See, the people who put out these stories simply have a different perspective than you. And since it's their perspective, it's totally valid and you shouldn't be ganging up on them and calling them names and saying what they're doing is disgusting or wrong. They're just doing what they think constitutes the "best" way to react to the virus.

It's just their perspective!!!

People like to label me as a "hoaxer" or a "COVID denier" or whatever but the reality is that I have a very different perspective than they do over what constitutes the "best" way to react to this virus.

 

[LittleBuford]

Nope, if drug and alcohol related admissions filled 1299 beds of 1300, would the 1 Covid patient be the cause of overwhelmed status?

Those aren’t the numbers you provided, though. I’m not going to engage in silly games involving made-up data.

 

[Lilofan]

Current bed capacity of my local overwhelmed hospital, 1300 bed capacity, less than 350 are Covid admissions. A majority of the remaining 75% of total capacity is comprised of drug and alcohol related conditions not simply diagnosis.

Did Mardi Gras happen early? Last time I was there in the Big Easy, many were much under the influence of many substances and drink and that was just in the early afternoon.

 

[lazyboy97o]

“We are pretty much at capacity”

hospital is “managing, but just barely,” at keeping up with the increased number of sick patients in the last three weeks.

“We had to treat patients in places where we normally wouldn’t, like in recovery rooms,”

In California several hospitals have set up large “surge tents”

All quotes from a Times article regarding the 2017/2018 flu season.

The sad reality is our hospitals can barely handle a bad flu season, they had no chance of keeping up with a pandemic. Will we learn and prepare for the next illness? probably not because it costs too much.

Hospitals being overwhelmed by a bad flu season was orders of magnitude different. The flu requires much less care and a bad season doesn’t persist for years.

More idle capacity isn’t necessarily being prepared. COVID requires more specialized care, so do you just increase more of everything? And even if the physical facilities exist, you can’t compel people to staff them. The past few years seem like a serious turn off to anyone looking to get into medicine.

 

[DisneyCane]

If 100% of people got vaccinated, then the only people in the hospital from COVID would be vaccination breakthroughs.

In that case, you would look at the raw numbers and see that 100% of the hospitalized are vaccinated and then declare vaccinations don't work.

Of course, that would be a very stupid fallacious conclusion. Very easy to see just how stupid that would be.


Now, let's say 80% of the population is vaccinated. And there are the same number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital. If vaccinations didn't work, then 80% of the people in the hospital should be the vaccinated and only 20% unvaccinated.

But, that's not what we're seeing. To make the case that because the number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital are the same amount, that therefore, vaccines don't work, would be making that very stupid fallacious argument in the first example.

That's not what was being discussed. I posted the data from Ontario, Canada which showed the daily case rate per 100k people being (pretty significantly) higher for the fully vaccinated population than it is for the unvaccinated and partially vaccinated. The post I was replying to said it was higher because there are more vaccinated people.

The data I posted was normalized for population so if 100% were fully vaccinated, the extrapolation would be that there would be more cases even if it doesn't seem to make logical sense.

The hospitalization rate for the fully vaccinated is lower so therefore there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths if 100% were fully vaccinated.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

From the bed planner I sleep with.

And this person told you, "Most of the people hospitalized are drug addicts or alcoholics?" Maybe move to a town that doesn't lace its drinking water with moonshine and heroine if you've constantly got more addicts hospitalized than people with heart issues, cancer, injuries from accidents, or respiratory ailments. Those are the top 3 leading causes of death in the pre-COVID era, by the way, so it seems likely that they also make up a sizeable portion of hospitalizations. But not where you live, right?

FastStats

FastStats is an official application from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) and puts access to topic-specific statistics at your fingertips.

www.cdc.gov

 

[DisneyCane]

See, the people who put out these stories simply have a different perspective than you. And since it's their perspective, it's totally valid and you shouldn't be ganging up on them and calling them names and saying what they're doing is disgusting or wrong. They're just doing what they think constitutes the "best" way to react to the virus.

It's just their perspective!!!

Except they are supposed to be reporting news not applying their perspective in news articles. If they did it as an opinion piece then it would be fine (although still exploitative).

 

[mmascari]

If 100% of people got vaccinated, then the only people in the hospital from COVID would be vaccination breakthroughs.

In that case, you would look at the raw numbers and see that 100% of the hospitalized are vaccinated and then declare vaccinations don't work.

Of course, that would be a very stupid fallacious conclusion. Very easy to see just how stupid that would be.


Now, let's say 80% of the population is vaccinated. And there are the same number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital. If vaccinations didn't work, then 80% of the people in the hospital should be the vaccinated and only 20% unvaccinated.

But, that's not what we're seeing. To make the case that because the number of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the hospital are the same amount, that therefore, vaccines don't work, would be making that very stupid fallacious argument in the first example.

Is that what the Ontario chart is doing though? Is it using the number of cases vs the entire population of all people to calculate the rate? If so, that would explain the difference vs every other chart.

Most of the charts take the number of cases where someone is vaccinated vs the population of vaccinated people. Likewise, the number of cases unvaccinated vs the unvaccinated population.

At the extremes, where one group is super larger or super small, it'll look messed up anyway. But, at 80% both groups should still be plenty big to not get that strange math where one case overdrives the rate.

If they're doing it like everyone else (and I didn't read close enough), then it's clearly an outlier vs other charts showing the same comparison. Which means there's some hidden thing driving the difference.

These are already rates and not raw totals, so it shouldn't just be the size of each population driving the differences.

I'm back to, something is messed up about that chart. Could be the chart or it could be something else driving the difference. Whatever the reason and whichever it is, it's going to be something interesting.

 

[Willmark]

Those are the million dollar questions…

We chose to let many prisoners out of prison to protect them from infection, then watched crime rates soar. The idea undoubtedly saved prisoners lives, but that probably doesn’t make their victims feel any better about it.

Closing schools is another decision that has undoubtedly saved lives, but we also know many students are now years behind and will likely never catch up. The students that won’t end up graduating, and will live difficult lives as a result, probably won’t feel any better about it.

Businesses permanently closed, a lifetime of work lost in months, marriages and families broken up due to stress and anxiety, etc, etc, etc. It’s always the unintended consequences that doom us. I’m not arguing any of the decisions were bad, just pointing out there’s always consequences and in most cases those consequences can’t be prevented.

Excellent post.

All choices are trade offs, whether this or anything else.

I’m sure someone will think of something but usually in life a choice has a corresponding consequence (as you note) that is in some way proportional (or sometimes not).I.e. Sometimes it’s small, sometimes is almost equal, sometimes greater.

In this whole situation of Covid I don’t see a situation where the devil isn’t in the details. Nor do I see situations that don’t have trade offs. It would be great to get past it without, I don’t see how that is possible.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Who was recently banned?

Some people come back over and over again. It’s weird how they can’t just leave a place they claim is ridiculous and awful and full of idiots.

 

[Kevin_W]

Is that what the Ontario chart is doing though? Is it using the number of cases vs the entire population of all people to calculate the rate? If so, that would explain the difference vs every other chart.

Most of the charts take the number of cases where someone is vaccinated vs the population of vaccinated people. Likewise, the number of cases unvaccinated vs the unvaccinated population.

At the extremes, where one group is super larger or super small, it'll look messed up anyway. But, at 80% both groups should still be plenty big to not get that strange math where one case overdrives the rate.

If they're doing it like everyone else (and I didn't read close enough), then it's clearly an outlier vs other charts showing the same comparison. Which means there's some hidden thing driving the difference.

These are already rates and not raw totals, so it shouldn't just be the size of each population driving the differences.

I'm back to, something is messed up about that chart. Could be the chart or it could be something else driving the difference. Whatever the reason and whichever it is, it's going to be something interesting.

You can look at the raw case #'s as well: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data#casesByVaccinationStatus

88% of ages 12+ are vaccinated and 82% of 5+. 85% or cases on Jan 5 are in fully vaccinated. So at least for this day in Ontario with whatever vaccines they used, there is little preventative power in the vaccine. 67% in hospitals are fully vaccinated and 41% in ICU. So those numbers improve quite a bit if you are vaccinated, but not nearly as much as has been reported in most other parts of the world.