Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Yeah, let's not pretend that it wasn't one of the intended purposes of these vaccines to actually prevent you from getting the virus in the first place (the high efficacy was talked about non-stop), with the other intention being if you were unlucky and still got it, it would help to prevent severe symptoms. I get that they were not designed for the current variant, so it is so much less effective in preventing infection. Things change but we should not gloss over the fact that this was the original intention (one of them), and probably the reason that most got the vaccine to begin with...given that it was sold in this manner. I bet this is one of the reasons why Bill Gates, among others, have stated that we needed vaccines that do better with preventing infection. I think some companies are working on this??

But they gave us percentages for various types of effectiveness (preventing infection, preventing hospitalization, and preventing death) - and the % for preventing infection was never cited as being 100%. The only pretending going on now is people pretending that we were promised 0 cases in vaccinated people when the vaccines rolled out. We weren't, but it's become an anti-vaxxer talking point to pretend that we were. It's gaslighting - and not in the good "59 Sound" kind of way.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
Nothing changed. There's no change to history or how things worked or were defined.

The only change has been how far into the details people are starting to dig and try to understand. It's like taking the Schoolhouse Rock How a Bill Becomes a Law song and then reading up on a more detailed (but still not every detail) view of the process and complaining that Schoolhouse Rock was a lie and everything changed. Then going back and reading an even more detailed view that's deeper into stuff the prior one glossed over too and calling that a lie also.

The only change has been the general public digging deeper down into the level of understanding instead of just a superficial one. Using that to call the superficial explanation wrong has been a bad faith argument to call the whole thing wrong since the beginning.

Bonus points when people take terms with specific technical meaning in the deeper explanations and instead use a more generic definition to say it means something different than it really does.
I am amazed that we are now pretending that these vaccines were not intended to prevent infection and were explained in that manner. Absolutely amazed. Right from the CDC website during the early stages of the pandemic. Preventing infection was a key component as was preventing severe illness....and this actually played out relatively well with the earlier variants....now only the latter does.

How Well the Vaccine Works​

  • Based on evidence from clinical trials, in people ages 18 years and older, the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.
  • The vaccine was also effective in clinical trials at preventing COVID-19 among people of diverse age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among people with underlying medical conditions.
  • Evidence shows mRNA COVID-19 vaccines offer similar protection in real-world conditions as they have in clinical trial settings―reducing the risk of COVID-19, including severe illness, by 90% or more among people who are fully vaccinated.
  • CDC will continue to provide updates as we learn more.
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member

Is that likely to impact data coming out of Orange county or not so much?

The chief acting as a whistleblower has been silenced but not before he spoke out.

Pretty sad when a public health official is punished for making public health recomendations.

Yes unless there is more than is being reported this seems to be a huge over-reaction. He's been on this since day one and has been doing a great job of keeping people informed. Hope to see him back.

Florida truly is the upside down…
Perhaps the report could include the full email that he sent. The use of ellipsis in the first quote clearly shows that they didn't include the entire text.

Until we see the full text of the email, we can't opine on whether or not what he said violated state law.

It should be noted that he wasn't fired. They placed him on administrative leave while investigating.

If all the email did was express frustration and they don't reinstate him then that would be wrong. If there is more to the email or he wrote or said something else which violated the law then termination would be justified.

I can't give an opinion either way due to lack of information but it doesn't stop others from immediately going on the anti-Florida leadership attack.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
But they gave us percentages for various types of effectiveness (preventing infection, preventing hospitalization, and preventing death) - and the % for preventing infection was never cited as being 100%. The only pretending going on now is people pretending that we were promised 0 cases in vaccinated people when the vaccines rolled out. We weren't, but it's become an anti-vaxxer talking point to pretend that we were. It's gaslighting - and not in the good "59 Sound" kind of way.
No one said 100%...ever. That is not my point at all.
 

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
I am amazed that we are now pretending that these vaccines were not intended to prevent infection and were explained in that manner. Absolutely amazed. Right from the CDC website during the early stages of the pandemic. Preventing infection was a key component as was preventing severe illness....and this actually played out relatively well with the earlier variants....now only the latter does.

How Well the Vaccine Works​

  • Based on evidence from clinical trials, in people ages 18 years and older, the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.
  • The vaccine was also effective in clinical trials at preventing COVID-19 among people of diverse age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among people with underlying medical conditions.
  • Evidence shows mRNA COVID-19 vaccines offer similar protection in real-world conditions as they have in clinical trial settings―reducing the risk of COVID-19, including severe illness, by 90% or more among people who are fully vaccinated.
  • CDC will continue to provide updates as we learn more.

Exactly! They stated somewhere between 90% and 94% effective at preventing infection for Moderna in the text you quoted. So why is it now that people are using "less than 100% effective" as an argument against vaccines and pretending we were ever given a 100% guarantee that they prevent any infections? New variants have resulted in lower efficacy, but they're still not 0% effective despite what some might try to claim.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
Exactly! They stated somewhere between 90% and 94% effective at preventing infection for Moderna in the text you quoted. So why is it now that people are using "less than 100% effective" as an argument against vaccines and pretending we were ever given a 100% guarantee that they prevent any infections? New variants have resulted in lower efficacy, but they're still not 0% effective despite what some might try to claim.
I am not using less than 100% as an argument for anything.. I am calling out that for some reason, some here want to pretend like preventing infection was never a thing. It absolutely was a thing (and stated by leaders and experts around the world) and the vaccines did a really good job early on with that. They just kind of do a crappy job with that when it comes to omicron. Luckily and thankfully, they still do well with preventing severe symptoms should you get the virus.

 

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
No one said 100%...ever. That is not my point at all.

No, but it's been discussed here as if <100% efficacy is a failure, and the post you responded to is one of them (which itself stemmed from another poster's false claim about mRNA vaccines). There's never been a vaccine that was touted as 100% effective, which is why we need as many people vaccinated as can safely get it (and is why we have vaccine requirements in public schools, colleges, etc. for other diseases).
 

disneygeek90

Well-Known Member
Yeah, let's not pretend that it wasn't one of the intended purposes of these vaccines to actually prevent you from getting the virus in the first place (the high efficacy was talked about non-stop), with the other intention being if you were unlucky and still got it, it would help to prevent severe symptoms. I get that they were not designed for the current variant, so it is so much less effective in preventing infection. Things change but we should not gloss over the fact that this was the original intention (one of them), and probably the reason that most got the vaccine to begin with...given that it was sold in this manner. I bet this is one of the reasons why Bill Gates, among others, have stated that we needed vaccines that do better with preventing infection. I think some companies are working on this??
You mention it, but I don't think it should be glossed over. The vaccines weren't created for this strain. In some ways we are lucky that they are still effective in any aspect. It's not the vaccines fault, the scientists, or the companies that fulfilled the orders that another variant was created. Perhaps they can create something that is more "universal," but that's incredibly over my knowledge on viruses, vaccines, and evolution.
 

dovetail65

Well-Known Member
Vaccines don't block viruses. They're not brick walls.

They just provide your body with the training to fight severe illness.

Saying that, Pfizer expects an omicron specific vaccine by March, and Moderna's not far behind.
They may not block them, it is better said the mRNA vaccine causes the body to make Antibodies that recognize the Covid virus, attach to the Covid virus, marking the Covid virus for destruction. In other words the the mRNA vaccine don't fight or block the virus at all it, the vaccine just gives our bodies the information to allow our own bodies to fight the virus.

For people that might want to know if they don't already below is how the mRNA vaccine work, if a person doesn't care don't read it:

From NYU Langone Health:

Viruses can’t reproduce themselves. They need a host. The coronavirus uses a spike protein to gain entry into the cells and start the replication process that makes us sick. In developing mRNA vaccines, scientists zeroed in on a unique spike protein that is found on the surface of the virus. On its own, this spike protein is incapable of causing COVID-19. The mRNA vaccines work by relaying a set of instructions for how to build this protein, with the goal of teaching your immune system how to disarm it.

This from the Medline Website:


Most vaccines contain a weakened or dead bacteria or virus. However, scientists have developed a new type of vaccine that uses a molecule called messenger RNA (or mRNA for short) rather than part of an actual bacteria or virus. Messenger RNA is a type of RNA that is necessary for protein production. In cells, mRNA uses the information in genes to create a blueprint for making proteins. Once cells finish making a protein, they quickly break down the mRNA. mRNA from vaccines does not enter the nucleus and does not alter DNA.

mRNA vaccines work by introducing a piece of mRNA that corresponds to a viral protein, usually a small piece of a protein found on the virus’s outer membrane. (Individuals who get an mRNA vaccine are not exposed to the virus, nor can they become infected by the vaccine.)
Using this mRNA blueprint, cells produce the viral protein. As part of a normal immune response, the immune system recognizes that the protein is foreign and produces specialized proteins called antibodies. Antibodies help protect the body against infection by recognizing individual viruses or other pathogens, attaching to them, and marking the pathogens for destruction. Once produced, antibodies remain in the body, even after the body has rid itself of the pathogen, so that the immune system can quickly respond if exposed again. If a person is exposed to a virus after receiving mRNA vaccination for it, antibodies can quickly recognize it, attach to it, and mark it for destruction before it can cause serious illness.

Note this says, "before it(Covid in this instance) can cause serious illness", not that we will not or can not get an illness at all. The gov should of said that right from the start. It's the same for vaccines of many types since their inception. Some citizens grabbed on to people still getting sick after vaccination as demonstrating that mRNA vaccines don't work when in fact it was never said from the start that no one would ever get ill after an mRNA vaccination.It's just not how they work some people immune system wont work as well as others to making the antibodies.
 
Last edited:

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
You mention it, but I don't think it should be glossed over. The vaccines weren't created for this strain. In some ways we are lucky that they are still effective in any aspect. It's not the vaccines fault, the scientists, or the companies that fulfilled the orders that another variant was created. Perhaps they can create something that is more "universal," but that's incredibly over my knowledge on viruses, vaccines, and evolution.
Oh, I 100% get that. And, yes, we are lucky they still prevent severe illness with the new variants. I don't blame the scientists at all. I just have an issue with others acting like that was supposed to be the only component of the vaccines.
 

disneygeek90

Well-Known Member
Oh, I 100% get that. And, yes, we are lucky they still prevent severe illness with the new variants. I don't blame the scientists at all. I just have an issue with others acting like that was supposed to be the only component of the vaccines.
I agree with you there. I am incredibly pro-vax and whenever others start saying "it wasn't supposed to prevent infection!!" I scratch my head a little. It absolutely was. The problem is that we've now gone through 2-3 variants after the vaccines were produced which obviously impacted the efficacy. Still very helpful and keeping people out of hospitals, but not preventing infection to the degree that they were last summer.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
My goodness! What on earth are you talking about? The immune system attacks a virus to PREVENT it from infecting you. When you are exposed to some random virus, if your immune system recognizes it, it tries to attack it. If it is successful, then it prevents you from being infected or at least prevents enough replication to keep you from having any symptoms. This is why we don't walk around constantly sick.
The immune system does not respond instantaneously. It takes time and some viruses can attach to cells and begin replicating in minutes.
This rewriting of history to pretend that the COVID vaccines weren't intended to prevent infection is bordering on insanity. How were they supposed to lead to herd immunity (which Dr. Fauci talked about when they were first made available) if they didn't prevent infection? You can't possibly have herd immunity if everybody is vulnerable to infection but they just don't have symptoms.
Says the guy who keeps trying to rewrite transmission as a binary constant. The math has been explained to you repeatedly.
That said, nothing prevents a virus or bacteria from entering your body if it is airborne. Your immune system prevents said virus or bacteria from developing into an infection.
No, there are things like mucus that protect against contagions.
 

correcaminos

Well-Known Member
I agree with you there. I am incredibly pro-vax and whenever others start saying "it wasn't supposed to prevent infection!!" I scratch my head a little. It absolutely was. The problem is that we've now gone through 2-3 variants after the vaccines were produced which obviously impacted the efficacy. Still very helpful and keeping people out of hospitals, but not preventing infection to the degree that they were last summer.
One thing I always caution. With the trials we never ever did randomized testing as part of the trial to catch asymptomatic. so when someone pulls that out as a "oh asymptomatic" well we never did check to begin with.

It was supposed to prevent infection as much as possible and now prevent even mild or moderate depending on what you're vaccinated with. There are varying degrees. Now I realize media likely didn't really go into not testing asymptomatic symptoms of trial patients regularly, but it was always there. Which is why I really never cared much about the NHL or whatever players who tested positive but had zero symptoms. We never measured that.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
I am amazed that we are now pretending that these vaccines were not intended to prevent infection and were explained in that manner. Absolutely amazed. Right from the CDC website during the early stages of the pandemic. Preventing infection was a key component as was preventing severe illness....and this actually played out relatively well with the earlier variants....now only the latter does.

How Well the Vaccine Works​

  • Based on evidence from clinical trials, in people ages 18 years and older, the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.
  • The vaccine was also effective in clinical trials at preventing COVID-19 among people of diverse age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among people with underlying medical conditions.
  • Evidence shows mRNA COVID-19 vaccines offer similar protection in real-world conditions as they have in clinical trial settings―reducing the risk of COVID-19, including severe illness, by 90% or more among people who are fully vaccinated.
  • CDC will continue to provide updates as we learn more.
All of those things are still true today except for the 94.1% value. At one dose (which was never enough) it's way way WAY lower. At two dose vs Omicron it's no longer 94.1% but way lower now. Presumably somewhere below 50%, but I haven't seen any attempt at an actual number being determine, just that it's clearly to low. With a third dose, still lower than 94.1% but appears to still be a serviceable number. An efficacy that's high enough for many people to not know they have it. And then the one Israel study that with a fourth dose it's no better than with three.

That's the only thing that's changed since then.

If we want to pretend that means it's not helpful at all now, that's the new definition. With a lower efficacy, it's clearly going to reduce infection spread less.

It's always been a reduction, and we've never driven the transmission low enough or gotten enough vaccinated to keep it low enough. With Omicron and it's impacts, it's really the boosted percentage that matters now. Having a "Fully Vaccinated" at 85% but a "Boosted" at 45% means the community is at 45%. I think everyone agrees that 45% is no where near enough vaccinated to achieve the group benefit components of vaccination.


None of this means vaccines don't work anymore, they're just less effective.
None of this means that vaccination is a personal thing only, it's still a group project to get the group benefits.
None of this means we should just let it rip.
We should work to continue to get the vaccinated percentage up, including the booster for a full course of doses. It's still the only way to end this.
 

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
You mention it, but I don't think it should be glossed over. The vaccines weren't created for this strain. In some ways we are lucky that they are still effective in any aspect. It's not the vaccines fault, the scientists, or the companies that fulfilled the orders that another variant was created. Perhaps they can create something that is more "universal," but that's incredibly over my knowledge on viruses, vaccines, and evolution.

The Army is working on one that is supposed to cover any type of coronavirus, but they just finished Phase 1 in December. As far as I know, they haven't given any sort of timeline for when they expect to request an EUA from the FDA. Hopefully it works and the only side effect is that it turns us all into Captain America (the superhero, not the poster - no offense @CaptainAmerica ).
 

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
None of this means vaccines don't work anymore, they're just less effective.
Meanwhile in Ontario, Canada:

ltc.jpg

The case rate continues to be higher for fully vaccinated people than either partially vaccinated or unvaccinated people.

I've got to get some stuff done so I don't have time to calculate the hospitalizations but there are 224 fully vaccinated people in the ICU, 18 partially vaccinated and 185 unvaccinated. There are a lot fewer people in the unvaccinated category so if calculated, this data will continue to show very high efficacy against severe outcomes. However, the data on infections continues to show very low, if any, efficacy vs. Omicron.
 

Nubs70

Well-Known Member
All of those things are still true today except for the 94.1% value. At one dose (which was never enough) it's way way WAY lower. At two dose vs Omicron it's no longer 94.1% but way lower now. Presumably somewhere below 50%, but I haven't seen any attempt at an actual number being determine, just that it's clearly to low. With a third dose, still lower than 94.1% but appears to still be a serviceable number. An efficacy that's high enough for many people to not know they have it. And then the one Israel study that with a fourth dose it's no better than with three.

That's the only thing that's changed since then.

If we want to pretend that means it's not helpful at all now, that's the new definition. With a lower efficacy, it's clearly going to reduce infection spread less.

It's always been a reduction, and we've never driven the transmission low enough or gotten enough vaccinated to keep it low enough. With Omicron and it's impacts, it's really the boosted percentage that matters now. Having a "Fully Vaccinated" at 85% but a "Boosted" at 45% means the community is at 45%. I think everyone agrees that 45% is no where near enough vaccinated to achieve the group benefit components of vaccination.


None of this means vaccines don't work anymore, they're just less effective.
None of this means that vaccination is a personal thing only, it's still a group project to get the group benefits.
None of this means we should just let it rip.
We should work to continue to get the vaccinated percentage up, including the booster for a full course of doses. It's still the only way to end this.
So get vaccinated by [insert date here] because we are going to let Omicron rip 3 weeks later?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom