Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[SamusAranX]

There are several reasons for this.

Population density is one. The few times they tried reopening people totally ignored any sort social distancing, mask wearing, etc. so things spread. And people who would ordinarily meet up in bars and restaurants are just gathering at each other's homes. Yes, they are not supposed to have large gatherings, but there is no way (or no will) to enforce this. All of these things combine to make it harder to control spread.

I also do not know if the hospitalizations at Miami hospitals is broken down so the correct county is listed. There have been large outbreaks in rural areas adjacent due to prisons and workers not being distanced, but they are transported to the Miami area.

Many rural FL counties also have an unusually high % of positive cases per population. They are counties with prisons and worker's barracks where people are in 24/7 proximity.

This is where personal responsibilities come into play. Why people would still have large gatherings, is beyond me

 

[Horizons '83]

So there is no evidence. Got it.

The northeast. You mean the area with the highest death rate in the country. Good example. Or Europe. England, Italy, Spain, great job guys! Asia, Japan didn’t lock down at all. Cool cool. Good examples. Lockdowns work.

I know you're smarter than that. You don't need evidence for something as basic as this but....

Hypothetical person #1, lets say me, TJ. I'm infected but don't know it. Governor X locks down state/city X. I follow that ordinance and cancel the trip I was going to take to Grandma who is at risk and sick. You can put 2 and 2 together to figure out what the lock down did right? Sometimes you don't need data for common sense things like this.

China did lockdown. Italy did lockdown. Japan did lock down.

 

[GoofGoof]

The disease itself is not a conspiracy theory. That's obvious, and not part of what I've said. Now that the money is flowing, there are many people who will try to shift the flow of that money, and take advantage of it. If the means discrediting a valid treatment option so you can have access to a larger piece of the pie, they will.

I have no doubt that some large corporations would be willing to do some unethical stuff for profit. We’ve seen it over the years in many industries. However, it seems unlikely that doctors and other public healthcare officials would join in on a conspiracy when there is no skin in the game for them. Do you really believe an ER doctor who knows a drug works will deliberately withhold the drug so some pharmaceutical company can get rich? Same with the FDA? It seems highly unlikely to me. I wanted that drug to work and be a huge part of the solution towards getting us through this. It didn’t pan out. That happens. There are other promising drugs being looked at. Hopefully one pans out.

 

[xdan0920]

I know you're smarter than that. You don't need evidence for something as basic as this but....

Hypothetical person #1, lets say me, TJ. I'm infected but don't know it. Governor X locks down state/city X. I follow that ordinance and cancel the trip I was going to take to Grandma who is at risk and sick. You can put 2 and 2 together to figure out what the lock down did right? Sometimes you don't need data for common sense things like this.

Yes. You do need data. It’s foolish to think lockdowns accomplished anything. The DATA shows very clearly that they didn’t help. At BEST they delayed the inevitable. At worst they caused unimaginable secondary damage.

I do think I’ve figured out the disconnect though. You believe lockdowns actually kept ALL people completely isolated. When in fact, they didn’t, people still need to eat, to work, to make money, to care for others, then there are those, young people mostly, who just had parties and hung out together at peoples homes and apartments. And spread things that way.

 

[mhochman]

The northeast. You mean the area with the highest death rate in the country.

I wonder if the high death rate in the northeast (and subsequent lower death rate in other regions) has anything to do with the northeast being the first area hit and essentially all of the standard practice and care being established there through trial and error.

*edited because the wrong segment of the original post got quoted

 

[xdan0920]

And New Jersey, who left school reopening up to individual districts is barreling towards an outright disaster in September.

My wife’s district has them working 5 days a week in school, half the kids one day, half the kids the next day.

My son is going to school Monday and Tuesday and alternating Wednesday’s. With Thursday and Friday virtual.

Doesn’t mitigate risk(incredibly low to begin with) doesn’t get the kids into a routine or a good situation. Forces parents to choose between working and being there for their kids.

Our % positive has been below 5% for a long long time.

Doesn’t matter. The panic and fear are deep seeded now.

 

[xdan0920]

I wonder if the high death rate in the northeast (and subsequent lower death rate in other regions) has anything to do with the northeast being the first area hit and essentially all of the standard practice and care being established there through trial and error.

For sure. You know what didn’t help at all? Lockdowns.

 

[SamusAranX]

I know you're smarter than that. You don't need evidence for something as basic as this but....

Hypothetical person #1, lets say me, TJ. I'm infected but don't know it. Governor X locks down state/city X. I follow that ordinance and cancel the trip I was going to take to Grandma who is at risk and sick. You can put 2 and 2 together to figure out what the lock down did right? Sometimes you don't need data for common sense things like this.

China did lockdown. Italy did lockdown. Japan did lock down.

In your scenario, even if the government said stay home, unless they’re threatening a massive fine (ergo, more then 100 bucks) or prison time, people can still choose to (and are) ignoring it.

 

[Horizons '83]

Yes. You do need data. It’s foolish to think lockdowns accomplished anything. The DATA shows very clearly that they didn’t help. At BEST they delayed the inevitable. At worst they caused unimaginable secondary damage.

I do think I’ve figured out the disconnect though. You believe lockdowns actually kept ALL people completely isolated. When in fact, they didn’t, people still need to eat, to work, to make money, to care for others, then there are those, young people mostly, who just had parties and hung out together at peoples homes and apartments. And spread things that way.

Not once did I say that but I think you would agree that it limited the amount people could interact with other people. That is my point. Lockdown's were never intended to stop all spread, but you can clearly see the difference in areas to were in lockdown longer and those like my state who re-open too early. There is plenty of data that shows NY/NJ now vs. GA/FL. I don't need to rehash that. Its good to stick to you're guns like you have throughout this thread, but realize its ok to listen to someone who might just have a difference in opinion, and actually be on to something.

 

[xdan0920]

Not once did I say that but I think you would agree that it limited the amount people could interact with other people. That is my point. Lockdown's were never intended to stop all spread, but you can clearly see the difference in areas to were in lockdown longer and those like my state who re-open too early. There is plenty of data that shows NY/NJ now vs. GA/FL. I don't need to rehash that. Its good to stick to you're guns like you have throughout this thread, but realize its ok to listen to someone who might just have a difference in opinion, and actually be on to something.

Show me data. Here’s a sample of some data.

Show me where lockdowns made any difference.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Show me evidence lockdowns have saved anyone.

Really? Look at what the transmission rates in FL, TX, etc. were before those states re-opened and what happened as soon as they started opening up. Do you think FL seeing 200+ deaths for multiple days recently and having a 7-day average death count over 100 per day is a coincidence?

 

[GoofGoof]

Feel free to talk about whatever you want, but are we really going to have this debate again??? The stay at home orders happened, they are over, nobody is proposing a return to full stay at home orders now. Without a time machine that allows you to go back in time and do things differently I don’t think it’s possible to quantify what the impacts of stay at home orders were. That goes both ways too. Nobody can quantify the number of lives saved just like nobody can quantify the economic or psychological impacts either. All we can do is speculate which is fine to do, but there’s no point in demanding evidence when there clearly isn’t any way there can be any.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Show me data. Here’s a sample of some data.
View attachment 488133
Show me where lockdowns made any difference.

You know, the bike enthusiast who came up with that graph thinks it's possible that lockdowns *increase* the spread of COVID.

Got any peer reviewed data?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

This should also be proof of the effectiveness of lockdowns!

And while NJ has seen it's R rise above 1 again, the timing has coincided with idiots throwing large parties (400 people at a house party in Brick, 700 at a house party in Jackson). When people follow the health and safety rules in place, things get better.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Show me data. Here’s a sample of some data.
View attachment 488133
Show me where lockdowns made any difference.

This is showing higher max daily deaths are positively associated with lockdown stringency. The problem is direction can't be determined from this. It could be that the lockdown severity came as a result of the deaths. One would need to look at what was happening pre- and post- lockdown. That's the key point of interest.

 

[October82]

The disease itself is not a conspiracy theory. That's obvious, and not part of what I've said. Now that the money is flowing, there are many people who will try to shift the flow of that money, and take advantage of it. If the means discrediting a valid treatment option so you can have access to a larger piece of the pie, they will.

But this isn't how any of this works. Scientists who assess the effectiveness of treatments aren't employed by pharmaceutical companies. They work for universities and governments, and publish in peer reviewed journals. Pharmaceutical companies have far less power and influence than you imagine that they do.

If standard R&D budgets are $2 - $3 billion per decade, that is $200 - $300 million that doesn't have to be spent this year, because its replaced by COVID funding. If the R&D for other products is delayed for a year, nobody will notice or care. We are delaying the education of an entire generation by a year.

This is a bit like the argument that we shouldn't be spending money on NASA because that money would be better spent on cancer research. The problem is that aerospace engineers make poor cancer researchers. The same is true here. The other diseases and the need for drugs to treat them didn't go away. The way research is funded is that it is tied to specific research and development questions. We can't just move it around 'on a whim'.

No one is having their education delayed for a year. Online education is challenging and it takes time to learn - just like it takes time to learn how to develop treatments and vaccines - but kids are still in school. We need to address the problems directly, not imagine that the problem has gone away.

 

[xdan0920]

Really? Look at what the transmission rates in FL, TX, etc. were before those states re-opened and what happened as soon as they started opening up. Do you think FL seeing 200+ deaths for multiple days recently and having a 7-day average death count over 100 per day is a coincidence?

So, that’s evidence they don’t work. Since you can’t lockdown indefinitely.

 

[xdan0920]

You know, the bike enthusiast who came up with that graph thinks it's possible that lockdowns *increase* the spread of COVID.

View attachment 488138


Got any peer reviewed data?

Do you? The answer is no, you don’t.

Funny, you criticize that guy, meanwhile, you do the same thing, you’ve written a veritable thesis on Covid in these two threads.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Scale backs begin

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Here's where you can see the lockdown's effect in NJ. We locked down around March 16 or so (I forget the exact date, but I know my last day in my office was Monday the 15th to get my computer and my wife and I were getting curbside dinner a few days later). The 7-day average of new daily cases peaked on April 7 - 3 weeks after 3/16 and then plateaued with a gradual decline for a couple weeks before beginning a steeper decline. The 7-day average of daily deaths peaked April 21 - 2 weeks after the 7-day average peak of daily cases. It's almost as if the lockdown slowed the spread of the virus!

New Jersey COVID - Coronavirus Statistics - Worldometer

New Jersey COVID-19 Coronavirus update by county with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, current active cases, recoveries, historical data, trends, projections, and timeline.

www.worldometers.info