Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[oceanbreeze77]

just want to tell you all that, in my opinion, this is nuts. here's the positive rates in NYC over time (from forward.ny.gov). june 29: 23,327 tested, 240 positive.

View attachment 480724

i know some of you don't quite know the day-to-day nature of NYC, but the idea that you would be able to suppress any kind of virus there for an indefinite period of time is honestly one of the more naive things a politician or public health official has ever assumed. whether you think the virus just ran its course here already, or that we CRUSHED THE CURVE(!!!), the reality is the city has had 1% positive rate since june 15, 2% since june 3,and it's been since may 23 that they had a 5% rate. in a city of 8.5 million, on 6/29, there were 461 covid patients hospitalized, 120 of those in ICU. at the peak on 4/12, there we 12,184 COVID hospitalizations, 3,122 of which were in the ICU. hard not to see why people become frustrated when the goal posts are constantly moved.

I think its because they seewhats happening in other states with indoor dining. Scientists are really looking into what indoor dining has done, as many states are tracing cases back to restaurants. I understand NY using caution.

 

[SoFloMagic]

Is there a reason why less tests is so bad? Why can't it be interpreted as less people being tested because less people needed to be? Sincerely curious.

What I keep hearing from experts is you want to "cast a wide net" so you catch as many cases as possible and can isolate those people.

Positive percentage should go down if you're testing enough (testing more but finding proportionally less virus).

If positive % is going up, you're finding more and more and need to test more until your % stabilizes to see where you really are on the curve.

 

[Jrb1979]

just want to tell you all that, in my opinion, this is nuts. here's the positive rates in NYC over time (from forward.ny.gov). june 29: 23,327 tested, 240 positive.

View attachment 480724

i know some of you don't quite know the day-to-day nature of NYC, but the idea that you would be able to suppress any kind of virus there for an indefinite period of time is honestly one of the more naive things a politician or public health official has ever assumed. whether you think the virus just ran its course here already, or that we CRUSHED THE CURVE(!!!), the reality is the city has had 1% positive rate since june 15, 2% since june 3,and it's been since may 23 that they had a 5% rate. in a city of 8.5 million, on 6/29, there were 461 covid patients hospitalized, 120 of those in ICU. at the peak on 4/12, there we 12,184 COVID hospitalizations, 3,122 of which were in the ICU. hard not to see why people become frustrated when the goal posts are constantly moved.

Its why I never understood why they didn't go the route we did where I live. Restaurants are only allowed patio seating.

 

[baymenxpac]

Has it been determined that a majority of all cases and deaths were concentrated in NYC? Thinking about the idea of that is overwhelming because NY state is huge.

yes. NYC has reported 23,096 deaths. NYS has 32,032 deaths. so 72.1 percent of the deaths in the city. i don't know where dave lives, but upstate is very different from downstate. there are some counties in NY where, as the governor said at one of his briefings, livestock outnumbers people. downstate in westchester, NYC, and long island, it's more populated.

I think its because they seewhats happening in other states with indoor dining. Scientists are really looking into what indoor dining has done, as many states are tracing cases back to restaurants. I understand NY using caution.

look, that's great, and i get it. i don't necessarily disagree with you, because caution is a good thing. i think there are two really important factors at play, which are:

1) the governor is really assuming way too much resiliency in small businesses. no, of course no restaurant wants to preside over a "super spreader" event, but i think it's a little foolhardy to think that everyone is just going to permanently survive on outdoor seating "just in case." many restaurants and other businesses just barely made it through this. to say, "oh, well, there's a really high positivity rate in yuma, arizona and houston, texas so....let's keep our NYC restaurants to outdoor dining," is kind of a jump in logic that i'm not quite understanding, especially when we're supposed to be taking some weird (and likely undeserved) victory lap here?

2) NYC, and to a large extent, the rest of the country, is going to have to assume a little bit of risk. i get it. i have elderly grandparents, i have parents, i have kids. i love them all. i'd never, ever want to put any of them at risk. the reality right now is that while lockdowns may have been effective and the slow roll out may still be the right way to go, there's almost nothing that you can classify as risk-free, especially in a city so densely populated. and with the FDA setting a 50% threshold of effectiveness for a vaccine, your risk is likely never be zero, even if it's significantly suppressed.

i don't know. i think the governor has done a fairly good job acting in a time of unprecedented uncertainty (and he has made some large and tragic missteps, too). this latest move though just doesn't compute, at least for me.

 

[jaklgreen]

I’m making significantly less money, and I haven’t been able to stop working for a day. And I live In New Jersey.

Same with me. The food establishment that I work at never closed, they just cut all of our hours. I get no paid sick time, no paid vacation day, if I am not there, I don't get paid. I work between 3-7 hours a day, usually about 4 1/2. I would have been in a better situation if the place closed so that I could get the unemployment. It makes me angry that businesses are allowed to do this, all while they get their check from the government.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Your right. We should close everything.

Then we will be a nation of healthy people, all with no money, no jobs, no hope.

All because of a sickness that 80% of us get only MILD symptoms.

80% of COVID-19 patients experience 'mild' symptoms â but that likely still involves a fever and cough

A mild case of the coronavirus probably feels more severe than you'd expect. It almost certainly involves a fever.

www.businessinsider.com

80% of us reading this now if we got full blown COVID will have the sniffles and a cough, that's it. Why are the needs of the few out way the needs of the many?

Lets think about the balance here. Open slow so we can al get back to work. Gyms open not just so I can bench press. So that the 30 people who work there can feed their families.

You’re comprehension is poor. “Mild” meant not requiring hospitalization. Being home with pneumonia for weeks was considered mild.

 

[Touchdown]

The fact of the matter is singing drinking and eating without a mask in a closed space with a large group of people is the easiest way to spread Covid. We should be opening up but in a targeted way. Unfortunately because of this churches, restaurants, bars and clubs should be the last places to open up and should not be open at this time. People however can’t help themselves.

 

[xdan0920]

A Dire Warning From COVID-19 Test Providers

U.S. coronavirus testing could fail again, as surging demand creates new backlogs and delays.

www.theatlantic.com

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article243922932.html

Scary!

If someone could point me to a state where more testing = less Covid, I would be more worried about this.

 

[Miss Bella]

Its why I never understood why they didn't go the route we did where I live. Restaurants are only allowed patio seating.

I don’t recall patio seating at restaurants in NYC. My city of 35k has no restaurants with patio seating.

 

[Horizons '83]

I don’t recall patio seating at restaurants in NYC. My city of 35k has no restaurants with patio seating.

Sounds like a business opportunity to me.

 

[Lilofan]

I don’t recall patio seating at restaurants in NYC. My city of 35k has no restaurants with patio seating.

I knew some that lived in midtown NYC. There was patio seating in front of the hole in wall restaurants. Not much but about 3-5 tables squeezed together in each location.

 

[GoofGoof]

I don’t recall patio seating at restaurants in NYC. My city of 35k has no restaurants with patio seating.

There are some places in NYC, but space is at a premium so not a lot of outdoor seating. Where I live in PA outside of Philly there are some places which created more outdoor seating due to restrictions. They closed part of the parking lot and setup tables and a few places even added string lights and other touches to make it feel less like “eating in the parking lot”. There was talk of closing a few streets in Philly to car traffic to allow people to walk in the street and restaurants to use the whole sidewalk for tables. It’s definitely not full capacity for these places.

The other issue is weather. July and Aug get hot and humid around here and we get a lot of thunderstorms. Not FL bad, but it can be unpleasant some days outside. This is also a temporary fix because by end of Sept it gets too cold at night unless places in eat in those heater lamps. It’s a decent temporary fix but can’t last forever.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I don’t recall patio seating at restaurants in NYC. My city of 35k has no restaurants with patio seating.

They certainly exist. The juniors by Shubert Alley immediately comes to my mind.

Bryant Park is one big patio seating for neighboring Chipotle’s and Sandwich Shops.

Times Square has all those red chairs and tables for outdoor seating.

 

[GoofGoof]

Scary!

If someone could point me to a state where more testing = less Covid, I would be more worried about this.

I assume you are joking.

The amount of testing doesn’t change the current number of cases. If you are sick, you are sick whether you test positive or don’t get tested. It does have a direct impact on the future number of cases assuming people actually quarantine once they test positive. The sooner you identify someone who is positive the better. They quarantine and don’t infect others. Back in March/April when testing was scarce only people with severe symptoms got permission to be tested. People who came into direct contact with those sick people but had no symptoms themselves were denied testing. It definitely added to the spread. Today with much more testing rolled out a lot of asymptomatic people are testing positive, especially when a bar or other location is linked to an outbreak and people who went there get tested. It’s what that other guy posted continuously about (did he get banned or just give up?), young people with little or no symptoms testing positive in FL. Without the testing they wouldn’t have known they were positive and would have potentially infected more people.

 

[WDWTrojan]

yes. NYC has reported 23,096 deaths. NYS has 32,032 deaths. so 72.1 percent of the deaths in the city. i don't know where dave lives, but upstate is very different from downstate. there are some counties in NY where, as the governor said at one of his briefings, livestock outnumbers people. downstate in westchester, NYC, and long island, it's more populated.



look, that's great, and i get it. i don't necessarily disagree with you, because caution is a good thing. i think there are two really important factors at play, which are:

1) the governor is really assuming way too much resiliency in small businesses. no, of course no restaurant wants to preside over a "super spreader" event, but i think it's a little foolhardy to think that everyone is just going to permanently survive on outdoor seating "just in case." many restaurants and other businesses just barely made it through this. to say, "oh, well, there's a really high positivity rate in yuma, arizona and houston, texas so....let's keep our NYC restaurants to outdoor dining," is kind of a jump in logic that i'm not quite understanding, especially when we're supposed to be taking some weird (and likely undeserved) victory lap here?

2) NYC, and to a large extent, the rest of the country, is going to have to assume a little bit of risk. i get it. i have elderly grandparents, i have parents, i have kids. i love them all. i'd never, ever want to put any of them at risk. the reality right now is that while lockdowns may have been effective and the slow roll out may still be the right way to go, there's almost nothing that you can classify as risk-free, especially in a city so densely populated. and with the FDA setting a 50% threshold of effectiveness for a vaccine, your risk is likely never be zero, even if it's significantly suppressed.

i don't know. i think the governor has done a fairly good job acting in a time of unprecedented uncertainty (and he has made some large and tragic missteps, too). this latest move though just doesn't compute, at least for me.

More research continues to show that indoor drinking/dining contributes greatly to spread. Anytime people are talking in air conditioned environments for long periods without masks. Keeping indoor dining and bars shut is a pretty reasonable way to open up other areas of the economy.

 

[hopemax]

just want to tell you all that, in my opinion, this is nuts. here's the positive rates in NYC over time (from forward.ny.gov). june 29: 23,327 tested, 240 positive.

i know some of you don't quite know the day-to-day nature of NYC, but the idea that you would be able to suppress any kind of virus there for an indefinite period of time is honestly one of the more naive things a politician or public health official has ever assumed. whether you think the virus just ran its course here already, or that we CRUSHED THE CURVE(!!!), the reality is the city has had 1% positive rate since june 15, 2% since june 3,and it's been since may 23 that they had a 5% rate. in a city of 8.5 million, on 6/29, there were 461 covid patients hospitalized, 120 of those in ICU. at the peak on 4/12, there we 12,184 COVID hospitalizations, 3,122 of which were in the ICU. hard not to see why people become frustrated when the goal posts are constantly moved.

The goal is to figure out what we can reopen, with manageable consequences. This round is telling us that things we thought we could reopen - bars & indoor dining may have to go in the same category as large gatherings. Bars especially. Next, we have to figure out if it was covidiots or spaces that were the problem, or if the space just attracts too many covidiots. In my state, they re-closed the bars, but the restaurants are still okay. So we'll see what happens.

After what NYC already went through, I don't understand why people would want to invite that kind of trouble a 2nd time? I know people think that because the people with antibodies is higher they are somehow more protected. But what if those theories are wrong? What if it only changes the speed at which things spin back up (longer lag), but once things spin back up they are just as severe as before? NYC got in its mess by not realizing how many people who had recently been in Italy, were walking around with the virus. How many people who visited other states are walking around with the virus now? Isn't it worth a short delay to make sure that your numbers are staying low, and it's not just lag? If you wait for the spikes before doing anything, you are just increasing the time it will take to settle back down. So is waiting a couple weeks now, better than reliving March/April in Aug/Sep? It's also about priorities, especially for the Mayor. What is more important, kids going back to school next month or indoor restaurants next week? I know people want to do both, but can we?

There still seems to be a problem understanding that today isn't about today, it's about what happened 2 weeks ago, 4 weeks ago, 6 weeks ago. Low ICU numbers today doesn't mean the virus isn't swirling around in an infancy state. There's lots we don't know, but one thing that is getting clearer to me is that it's a slower motion car wreck than I thought. Not that it isn't a car wreck, it's just too slow for American attention spans. The next 2-3 weeks are going to be annoying. Except in AZ, especially, where it's just going to be bad.

 

[milordsloth]

More research continues to show that indoor drinking/dining contributes greatly to spread. Anytime people are talking in air conditioned environments for long periods without masks. Keeping indoor dining and bars shut is a pretty reasonable way to open up other areas of the economy.

In terms of research, I can still only find the report on the restaurant in China from months ago. Do you have any links you can send for more current studies?

 

[oceanbreeze77]

In terms of research, I can still only find the report on the restaurant in China from months ago. Do you have any links you can send for more current studies?

the research is being done right now. Like I mentioned earlier, many of the new cases are being traced back to indoor bars/dining establishments.

 

[hopemax]

Since I brought up Arizona.

Arizona coronavirus: Latest maps and county-by-county numbers

The Republic is tracking coronavirus cases across Arizona. Here's where things stand now.

www.azcentral.com

There is a graph for cases, with a toggle to switch to deaths. It has both the daily numbers and the 7 day average. The 7 day average for cases starts trending up 5/27. The 7 day average for deaths starts trending up on 6/11. Today's high of 88 deaths represents 5% of their total deaths.

 

[Ponderer]

1) the governor is really assuming way too much resiliency in small businesses. no, of course no restaurant wants to preside over a "super spreader" event, but i think it's a little foolhardy to think that everyone is just going to permanently survive on outdoor seating "just in case." many restaurants and other businesses just barely made it through this. to say, "oh, well, there's a really high positivity rate in yuma, arizona and houston, texas so....let's keep our NYC restaurants to outdoor dining," is kind of a jump in logic that i'm not quite understanding, especially when we're supposed to be taking some weird (and likely undeserved) victory lap here?

2) NYC, and to a large extent, the rest of the country, is going to have to assume a little bit of risk. i get it. i have elderly grandparents, i have parents, i have kids. i love them all. i'd never, ever want to put any of them at risk. the reality right now is that while lockdowns may have been effective and the slow roll out may still be the right way to go, there's almost nothing that you can classify as risk-free, especially in a city so densely populated. and with the FDA setting a 50% threshold of effectiveness for a vaccine, your risk is likely never be zero, even if it's significantly suppressed.

The missing element here - and it's part of why Europe has succeeded where we have failed - is support for individuals and businesses so we CAN lockdown. There shouldn't be a choice between a business having to operate during a pandemic - we should be using the full faith and credit of the United States to support the country so we don't have to make these sort of decisions.

We've seen too many countries who paired lockdowns with intense financial support come out of this and starting to return to a cautious state of normalcy. It's not going to be completely safe until there are vaccines or even treatments, but the best chance we have at a functional economy is to starve this thing of its food supply. Because it doesn't matter what governmental dictates happen. If people start seeing an imminent threat, they will stop patronizing their establishments. Government didn't lead with lockdowns; scared people did. They stopped making reservations and such, and government just formalized it.

The thing is, I believe we can get to a point where we're at an acceptable risk, with gigantic amounts of testing and contact tracing. But we were never even near the most minimal requirements for making that happen. And it's very likely COVID already mutated once to make itself exponentially more communicable - and we keep seeing weirder and weirder damage, even in young people. We have to face the reality that half-efforts and equivocations are not gonna be enough against this disease. We have to go on a war footing.