Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[JohnD]

The spread is easier in indoor areas, they are pretty much all in line with that. When it comes to outdoor they range in opinions. Still being deeply studied.

Everyone Thinks They’re Right About Masks

How the coronavirus travels through the air has become one of the most divisive debates in this pandemic.

www.google.com

Is it Safe to Exercise Outside as Coronavirus Continues to Spread?

Gyms are closed, but are the outdoors open for your workout?

www.google.com

I'm surprised that asking whether its safe to exercise outside is even a question. It's outside, fresh air, you can spread out. Assuming you just leave the house, go on a walk, ride a bike, etc. But gathering in large groups, presumably, should still be a concern.

 

[DisneyCane]

So 75% are not long term care facility deaths? That’s scary. Thought it might be less.

Considering only 8% of the cases are in long term care facilities it should be less scary.

Related to that, 82% of deaths are in people aged 65+ while the same age group represents only 25% of the cases.

 

[Tazer19]

I fully expect the response that the small number of low risk people that get infected at WDW can then spread the virus to high risk people when they get home. First, the same low risk people can get infected at the grocery store. Second, if you can't stay away from high risk people for 14 days after returning from WDW then don't go to WDW. Let's not go to the "six degrees of separation scenario" of somebody getting infected at WDW because they came into contact with somebody from a different area from where they live and then returning to the area where they live and going grocery shopping and spreading it to somebody in the grocery store. Assuming there are social distancing and sanitary measures at the grocery store (or other location) in the home area, the prevalence of this type of spread due to visiting WDW is going to be very low.

Notice I didn't say that the risk is zero. I accept the fact that with WDW open there will be some number of people infected that wouldn't have been infected if it remained closed. I believe that if WDW opened with some modification to the operation, the benefits of both the enjoyment of the guests and employment of the CMs would FAR outweigh the detrimental effect of the unlucky people that end up with a serious illness or death due to WDW operating. People in the high risk groups can choose to stay away from WDW (or any other public place) to minimize the risk that they get sick although they should have the right to take the risk if they want to.

First, upon returning it may be easy for someone to knowingly stay away from a high risk person, if they know they are a high risk person. What if you work with someone high risk, but don’t know they are high risk? What about the health care worker who works with any number of high risk individuals on a daily basis? Should they not be allowed to visit? Or if they do, be willing to skip work for 14 days upon return? If Disney World is open, I’m going to assume that many of the other current restrictions are lifted, which likely means the average person is interacting with many more people than they do today, 6 feet or not. You’re asking people to be a lot more transparent about their whereabouts and health in this scenario.

Second, at no time, will the my enjoyment of visiting WDW outweigh even a single person dying. Ever.

 

[DisneyCane]

I'm surprised that asking whether its safe to exercise outside is even a question. It's outside, fresh air, you can spread out. Assuming you just leave the house, go on a walk, ride a bike, etc. But gathering in large groups, presumably, should still be a concern.

Maybe, maybe not. Nobody would volunteer for the study so maybe they could do it with animals but the only way to really know for sure would be to create a large group outdoors and seed it with COVID-19 positive patients and then see how many people get infected and what their proximity was to the positive seeds.

I think a key thing in all of this is that there is much that isn't really known by the experts. They are just educated guessing on a lot of it. As the article from The Atlantic states, they really don't know for sure exactly how the flu spreads and that virus family has been known for well over 100 years.

 

[Jon81uk]

Considering only 8% of the cases are in long term care facilities it should be less scary.

Related to that, 82% of deaths are in people aged 65+ while the same age group represents only 25% of the cases.

Thats not a surprise. Older people have lower immune systems and less ability to fight infection, also more likely to have pre-existing conditions that mean they are more likely to die. Basically if someone over 70 gets it, they are quite likely to die from it.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

I don't. We're at the point now where people will be dieing because of mass poverty if things don't open up (Including small and big businesses like WDW). The lockdown does not have much evidence of any benefits.

Then you haven't been paying attention. If we didn't shut everything down, hospitals would have to go into triage mode and we'd be as bad if not worse than Italy was at the peak of their deaths.

 

[hopemax]

Here's another report on the earlier cases: https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/22/us/california-deaths-earliest-in-us/index.html

This is weird. The reporting and people freaking out about the earlier case. Early on, the Kirkland Fire Department reviewed their call logs and realized they started receiving calls about patients with respiratory distress in late January. Which matched with the Seattle Twitter epidemiologist who estimated that there had already been 6 weeks of community spread by the time of the first “official” cause of death. It also matches Flu Study guy, who didn’t die, but was tested in January. The timeline at the bottom of that CNN article, right there says Jan 21st!

I know there is a difference between “official” and presumed, but I feel like the West Coast, and especially the Seattle medical community knew it was here in January and people had died prior to the first “official” death, they just didn’t have the confirming blood sample, because we weren’t testing bodies in early February. I assume people had been cremated and those that weren’t, I am not sure how much they want to go to family and ask for exhumations.

Confirmation is good, but I don’t think it alters the timeline I have been following. And it doesn’t mean that it has been here In November. It just means that they can confirm their previous assumptions. I know the media has a short attention span and all but any person who has been paying attention, this shouldn’t be “shocking.”

 

[GoofGoof]

Requires a warrant.

Police need warrant for GPS tracking: court

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that police cannot put a GPS device on a suspect's car to track his movements without a warrant, a test case that upholds basic privacy rights in the face of new surveillance technology.

www.reuters.com

I know you aren’t saying that it’s the case, but the contact tracing app that started this whole conversation will not require a warrant because it’s not tracking your location. It’s something you opt into by downloading the app and turning it on. The police, federal government, Google/Apple will not be able to use the app to track you because it doesn’t work that way. The app doesn’t store where you came into contact with another person just when and even that information is stored locally on your phone. The time stamp is only used to determine anyone who had contact in the last X number of days. Even if someone hacked the system all they would get is a list of unique identifiers that you came within 6 feet of over the last 14 days (using 6ft and 14 days as an example). When one of those unique identifiers turns to positive (from the user changing their status on the app) then you get an alert and you go get tested.

 

[Jrb1979]

That hasn't happened to us. Therefore a reasonable conclusion is we can lessen restrictions and allow more businesses and activities to resume.

They are starting to do that in places but with social distancing in place. I have a feeling that's here to stay for awhile.

 

[Jon81uk]

That hasn't happened to us. Therefore a reasonable conclusion is we can lessen restrictions and allow more businesses and activities to resume.

New York hospitals have been overloaded and are in chaos.

 

[Polynesia]

With Governor Ron DeSantis’ Re-Open Florida Task Force Executive Committee now fully assembled, it seems the governor is already in talks with Walt Disney World executives in order to spearhead a plan for reopening businesses across Florida. The special committee is tasked with figuring out a timetable on when the local parks, like Walt Disney World, will be able to reopen, and they will be meeting today to determine the first potential steps.
According to Spectrum News 13, some of the steps being considered include:
Timetable for coming back

• Reopening will have to be gradual
• State residents, then national and international visitors

The Task Force will be determining gradual reopening steps for the state, which is considered to be approaching Phase One of the White House’s three-phase reopening guidelines. Also under consideration is the notion of opening to local and state residents first, then national and international visitors.

Final recommendations will be sent in by the end of the week for the Governor to review.

 

[GoofGoof]

So 75% are not long term care facility deaths? That’s scary. Thought it might be less.

In the county I live in it’s 64%. The 2 townships with the most deceased patients are almost 100% from long term care facilities. It’s not surprising to see the number of cases with staff because in a lot of cases the residents need direct care and help with walking, bathing and even eating. There’s a lot of direct contact. My aunt is a retired nurse who worked at a long term care facility. It’s a physical job. No way to avoid interacting.

64 Percent Of Montco's Coronavirus Deaths Are In Nursing Homes

Montgomery County is working to improve conditions in local nursing homes, which have seen a bulk of the area's coronavirus fatalities.

news.yahoo.com

 

[Kevin_W]

Basically if someone over 70 gets it, they are quite likely to die from it.

Not true at all. The latest study I found estimates ~4% fatality rate for ages 70-79 and 8% for ages 80+, and that still probably undercounts the denominator of total cases by quite a lot. Those rates are much higher than for younger ages but still a long, long way from "quite likely".

 

[Polynesia]

Not true at all. The latest study I found estimates ~4% fatality rate for ages 70-79 and 8% for ages 80+, and that still probably undercounts the denominator of total cases by quite a lot. Those rates are much higher than for younger ages but still a long, long way from "quite likely".

Thank you for clarifying that. Quite likely is a very scary proposition. I knew that wasn’t accurate but didn’t know the actual stats. Appreciate your posting them.

 

[Jon81uk]

Not true at all. The latest study I found estimates ~4% fatality rate for ages 70-79 and 8% for ages 80+, and that still probably undercounts the denominator of total cases by quite a lot. Those rates are much higher than for younger ages but still a long, long way from "quite likely".

But in response to the post I quoted about care homes, you are more likely to have a pre-existing condition if you are in a care home, which raises the chance of dying.

It also feels sensible to set expectations, my parents are only in their 60s, but I am concerned that if they catch it, there is a much bigger chance they will die compared to if I caught it.

 

[Kevin_W]

Then you haven't been paying attention. If we didn't shut everything down, hospitals would have to go into triage mode and we'd be as bad if not worse than Italy was at the peak of their deaths.

...based on models that have since been proven to be very, very wrong. We simply don't know what would have happened if we didn't shut everything down. The government/health offices acted on the best information they had and tried to err on the conservative side, which makes sense, but there is still so much unknown that we can't really predict would would have happened otherwise.

 

[GoofGoof]

With Governor Ron DeSantis’ Re-Open Florida Task Force Executive Committee now fully assembled, it seems the governor is already in talks with Walt Disney World executives in order to spearhead a plan for reopening businesses across Florida. The special committee is tasked with figuring out a timetable on when the local parks, like Walt Disney World, will be able to reopen, and they will be meeting today to determine the first potential steps.
According to Spectrum News 13, some of the steps being considered include:
Timetable for coming back

• Reopening will have to be gradual
• State residents, then national and international visitors

The Task Force will be determining gradual reopening steps for the state, which is considered to be approaching Phase One of the White House’s three-phase reopening guidelines. Also under consideration is the notion of opening to local and state residents first, then national and international visitors.

Final recommendations will be sent in by the end of the week for the Governor to review.

Good information.

One point that I think makes a lot of sense is opening for state residents first then national then international. I don’t know if Disney could open more than MK and maybe a hotel or 2 for just FL residents but that would make the most sense. If things heat up it’s easier to trace cases if they are contained to 1 state. You also avoid the risk of people coming in from hot spots and spreading the virus. As states open on staggered timelines there’s no way WDW should allow guests from a state that isn't In phase 3 to visit. So if Florida gets there earlier than most states, open up to locals only. I’m sure that would anger out of state guests but its better to be safe than sorry

 

[Jrb1979]

...based on models that have since been proven to be very, very wrong. We simply don't know what would have happened if we didn't shut everything down. The government/health offices acted on the best information they had and tried to err on the conservative side, which makes sense, but there is still so much unknown that we can't really predict would would have happened otherwise.

Its also why they can't open everything quickly. There is much unknown still.
Here in Canada the chief medical officer has stated that large gatherings are most likely not going to happen here til there is a way to treat this or a vaccine. That rules our theme parks, sporting events and concerts here for the time being.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

...based on models that have since been proven to be very, very wrong. We simply don't know what would have happened if we didn't shut everything down. The government/health offices acted on the best information they had and tried to err on the conservative side, which makes sense, but there is still so much unknown that we can't really predict would would have happened otherwise.

It has nothing to do with the models. It has to do with reality. We can easily compare those countries who chose not to shut down against those who did and see what the difference is.

 

[danlb_2000]

Then you haven't been paying attention. If we didn't shut everything down, hospitals would have to go into triage mode and we'd be as bad if not worse than Italy was at the peak of their deaths.

I agree that the shut down is necessary to slow the spread, but we also need to look at the question of how long this level of lock down is sustainable. Yes, we have social program to help people through this, but how long until they start running out of money? How long until lock downs start to compromise our supply chain?