Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

DCBaker

Premium Member
"All undergraduate courses are shifting to remote learning effective Wednesday, UNC announced in an email Monday.

Graduate, professional and health affairs schools will continue to teach courses as they are or as directed by individual schools.

The University is also continuing its efforts to de-densify on-campus housing. Students can cancel contracts with Carolina Housing with no penalty, and residents with hardships — such as students without reliable internet access, international students or student athletes — will have the option to remain, the email states. "

"This decision comes after the University's COVID-19 positivity rate rose from 2.8 percent to 13.6 percent last week. As of Monday, the University has 177 students in isolation and 349 students in quarantine both on and off campus."


Screen Shot 2020-08-17 at 4.03.05 PM.png
 
Last edited:

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
I know it hasn’t been true in Florida, but the national pattern is to always see a big dip in cases reported on Sunday-Monday, it’s probably a sign you are just returning to the norm. If your percentage positive drops this week then it would be the biggest sign yet your peak is ending.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
On the topic of testing, does anyone know if any of the FL Universities are requiring a negative Covid test to return to campus? I know some others have required it and if so that could lead to a spike in testing the week before college goes back (especially for the big state schools).
 

Jedijax719

Well-Known Member
Or (d) there hasn't been a major spreader incident, so people aren't concerned about getting tested. There was an incident of community spread (versus nursing home, jail, etc) locally, and the number of people getting tested per day shot up. Now the numbers are way down - back to where they were before the incident.
Possible. And less people at WDW and Universal because schools are about to start (whatever that means in this day and age). However, with schools starting, the super-spreader events will be daily. Our school thinks it will be clever to have 4 lunch periods instead of 3. Even if half the students show up, that will be 400 kids at each lunch (we have around 3200 students so half would be 1600 divided into 4 lunches).
 

disneygeek90

Well-Known Member
On the topic of testing, does anyone know if any of the FL Universities are requiring a negative Covid test to return to campus? I know some others have required it and if so that could lead to a spike in testing the week before college goes back (especially for the big state schools).
I saw a Facebook post from where I went for undergrad that they were offering tests but not required.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
Numbers are out -
Do they report the turn around time on the testing anywhere?

I haven't seen any consistent reporting on how long test results are taking to come back. But, it could just be the reporting I'm looking at. That's the number I really want to see. If they reported 40K results that all came back in 24 hours vs 90K where 50K of them took over a week. Thanks for posting these too.

What makes me upset is there are plenty of places with extremely low spread that are still staying closed. What makes me upset is that what has been learned at places of businesses like warehouses and factories will not be considered for schools. 14 day quarantine? No. You test negative and come back.
This is why I'm interested in the turn around time. If a positive case contact is identified, ideally we want them to get a test and have the result in a day or two. Anecdotally, it sounds like the time to have a test taken has gotten shorter, but the result is still taking to long. If it's like last month, where it takes a week to get the test done, and another to get the result, there's no difference between a 14 day quarantine and a negative result.

Without seeing that specific reporting, I'm assuming places like NY that had large community spread and are now reporting under 1% positivity must have solved this problem. Since that's a large part of how you contact trace and target isolation to eliminate community spread.

I can see where somewhere that hasn't solved this is reluctant to open schools, since they're counting on masks and distance to slow spread instead. Without it, it's hard to have a plan for when a case does show up.

What upsets me is that, as usual, the lowest income families will be hurt the most. Just creating more disparity.
You say think outside the box? People need to stop pretending ideas and practices cannot be determined. Many places aren’t even trying to figure it out. Some school districts are delaying reopening entirely. Not even a virtual model. Just delay the first day of school for like a month?! What the heck is that. There have been months to make this top priority and come up with plans. And for many areas, nothing.
There’s no excuse for a district not having a virtual plan. My district started working on it in March and continued all summer. I think in some places (especially where the politics highly favored a return to physical school no matter what) districts buried their heads in the sand and didn’t make a plan. Learning will suffer and maybe that’s the point. Make virtual learning so bad that it proves the point that physical learning would have been better.
It's definitely a failure. There's very little a school district can do to solve the test/trace/isolation stop community spread. Which is why it's all the more important they do solve the virtual learning problems which are within their control. In our district, they've expanded chromebooks from "those that need it" to "everyone" and increased the number of cellular access points for those that need it. They've also adjusted the schedule to accommodate meal distribution better. That still doesn't solve the childcare issues around virtual learning or unique scenarios that require in person. They working on a plan to bring only those needs back into the building, which should be easier to solve with distance than the entire school population.

On the flip side I can’t really say why some districts in areas with low community spread decided to go virtual. I laid out why my district made their call. Some districts near me are still planning a hybrid start to the year. Many schools in the part of NJ near me are going hybrid as well. I know NYC is going to try physical school too. The point is it’s not like there are no places with low spread opening for physical learning. It’s a mix. Each district has its own unique situations too so hard to say they should or shouldn’t open. It really needs to be a local decision.

This is what makes me think NYC has solved the "positive case contact-->test-->result" timeline to something that's fast enough to contain spread instead of just slow it. If other places with low community spread haven't solved this problem but achieved it more through distancing and general reduction of interactions, then virtual school makes sense. In these cases opening school would directly break the thing keeping their spread under control.

As a country, we could ramp up capacity, production and logistics for "positive case contact-->test-->result" anytime we want. While the new testing technologies arriving make this easier and cheaper, thus possible for smaller entities to do directly. It's a failure of political will that prevents us from doing it now.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Do they report the turn around time on the testing anywhere?

I haven't seen any consistent reporting on how long test results are taking to come back. But, it could just be the reporting I'm looking at. That's the number I really want to see. If they reported 40K results that all came back in 24 hours vs 90K where 50K of them took over a week. Thanks for posting these too.


This is why I'm interested in the turn around time. If a positive case contact is identified, ideally we want them to get a test and have the result in a day or two. Anecdotally, it sounds like the time to have a test taken has gotten shorter, but the result is still taking to long. If it's like last month, where it takes a week to get the test done, and another to get the result, there's no difference between a 14 day quarantine and a negative result.

Without seeing that specific reporting, I'm assuming places like NY that had large community spread and are now reporting under 1% positivity must have solved this problem. Since that's a large part of how you contact trace and target isolation to eliminate community spread.

I can see where somewhere that hasn't solved this is reluctant to open schools, since they're counting on masks and distance to slow spread instead. Without it, it's hard to have a plan for when a case does show up.



It's definitely a failure. There's very little a school district can do to solve the test/trace/isolation stop community spread. Which is why it's all the more important they do solve the virtual learning problems which are within their control. In our district, they've expanded chromebooks from "those that need it" to "everyone" and increased the number of cellular access points for those that need it. They've also adjusted the schedule to accommodate meal distribution better. That still doesn't solve the childcare issues around virtual learning or unique scenarios that require in person. They working on a plan to bring only those needs back into the building, which should be easier to solve with distance than the entire school population.



This is what makes me think NYC has solved the "positive case contact-->test-->result" timeline to something that's fast enough to contain spread instead of just slow it. If other places with low community spread haven't solved this problem but achieved it more through distancing and general reduction of interactions, then virtual school makes sense. In these cases opening school would directly break the thing keeping their spread under control.

As a country, we could ramp up capacity, production and logistics for "positive case contact-->test-->result" anytime we want. While the new testing technologies arriving make this easier and cheaper, thus possible for smaller entities to do directly. It's a failure of political will that prevents us from doing it now.
Not to put all the eggs in one basket but the new saliva quick tests that just got FDA approval look really promising. It’s same day fast, cheap to make and use and as an added bonus doesn‘t involve sticking a long q-tip looking thing up your nose until it touches brain. It’s too bad they didn’t have that approved and production ramped up a month ago. I believe if every school K-12 and colleges had access to cheap, easy and reliable testing they could implement a daily testing process and avoid a lot of these issues with closures and quarantines. Kids just about everywhere could go back to physical school without as much disruption.
 

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
Not to put all the eggs in one basket but the new saliva quick tests that just got FDA approval look really promising. It’s same day fast, cheap to make and use and as an added bonus doesn‘t involve sticking a long q-tip looking thing up your nose until it touches brain. It’s too bad they didn’t have that approved and production ramped up a month ago. I believe if every school K-12 and colleges had access to cheap, easy and reliable testing they could implement a daily testing process and avoid a lot of these issues with closures and quarantines. Kids just about everywhere could go back to physical school without as much disruption.

It's cheap, but even if test capacity is available it will be a strain for districts. My district (not large) has 16,739 students. So at $10 per test that's still $167,000 per week or about $5 million per school year. And our district just had their state funding cut by ~$3.5 million.They cannot print money like the federal government, so $8-9 million is a lot of money to come up with of cut from somewhere else (while spending money on remote learning resources).

That said, if it cost me an extra $40 per month to send my kid to physical school I'd gladly foot the bill.
 

George

Liker of Things
Premium Member
I really messed up. I had corona virus all trussed up and was beating an admission of guilt out of it with my trusty 2 x 4. Then, I took a tinkle break and that somehow wriggled out of its bonds and, I guess, oozed through the bay window to freedom. Took me weeks to lure it out of hiding with plates of Saltines. *sigh*
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
It's cheap, but even if test capacity is available it will be a strain for districts. My district (not large) has 16,739 students. So at $10 per test that's still $167,000 per week or about $5 million per school year. And our district just had their state funding cut by ~$3.5 million.They cannot print money like the federal government, so $8-9 million is a lot of money to come up with of cut from somewhere else (while spending money on remote learning resources).

That said, if it cost me an extra $40 per month to send my kid to physical school I'd gladly foot the bill.
They aren’t doing anything on the scale of daily testing, but it seems like both NYC and LA school districts have some pretty ambitious plans around testing. I do think that’s the best way to get schools open and keep them open.

 

hopemax

Well-Known Member
It's cheap, but even if test capacity is available it will be a strain for districts. My district (not large) has 16,739 students. So at $10 per test that's still $167,000 per week or about $5 million per school year. And our district just had their state funding cut by ~$3.5 million.They cannot print money like the federal government, so $8-9 million is a lot of money to come up with of cut from somewhere else (while spending money on remote learning resources).

That said, if it cost me an extra $40 per month to send my kid to physical school I'd gladly foot the bill.
I'm not sure how necessary it is to test all students all the time. Test everyone to start, regularly test the adults and maybe older students. The ones most likely to have many contacts outside of the classroom. Randomly test classes. If a positive is in a school, then decide if the whole school needs to be tested, or if it works to just test classrooms of siblings or something. Since the Federal government can print money, they should be providing the funds. It's a crisis situation that requires the highest level of coordination on a massive scale. Federal education spending sometimes has to happen.
 

mmascari

Well-Known Member
Well, for a country with 1.4B people, the number of cases for the past five months is only about 500. The number of deaths: 15.

Right now, there's only a handful of cases that they're contact tracing.

And when there is a surprise pop-up of CV, they immediately lock down the town until it's under control.
Exactly this. If you have the community spread to a low enough number to effectively contain spread, then you don't need to do things that only slow the spread. The containment and surveillance testing for missed containment is enough.

In the US, we're not all taking TB precautions every day. There's a vaccine, but almost nobody in the US has taken it. When a case shows up, it's contained quickly, stopping the spread.

That's how we get back to Disney without having to wear masks, distance, and reduce capacity. As a country, we need to contain the spread, and act quickly to keep it contained. With some statistical monitoring to finds gaps in containment before they become large and unmanageable.
 

monykalyn

Well-Known Member
It’s pretty obvious many didn’t. It’s pretty obvious many didn’t even come up with a plan or options depending on the situation.
yeah-like our district which sought parents input-overwhelmingly wanted to have 5 days a week in school. So district put together a plan with "community leaders, health experts, parents, teachers." We got option of hybrid or all virtual. Teachers were HANDED the plan and said "here it is" there was NO collaboration. Health commissioner is worthless (don't think he is smart enough to actually think beyond being swayed by latest news "reports" and certainly not facts). Developed by CEO's of the hospitals. One of which has a financial interest in hybrid as he is opening a new "child care center for working parents" on hospital campus. Same CEO who took advantage of grants/donations to finish out a floor in new tower for the "surge of covid patients"-that incidentally NEVER happened! Sat empty until finally a couple weeks ago decide to house the very few covid + together on that unit to make it easier on "doctor rounding" and I quote. New was starting to report more frequently on the "unused covid unit" too, and a major business provided a $1million dollar grant. That $1 million could have been used to open and revamp schools but nooooooooo......
. I can’t believe this country is in a position moving into third week of August with so many places obviously clueless on what to do.
Ohhh I can. No one wants to make a decision. No one wants to go against hysteria and instead go with facts because the media thrives on hysteria instead. Our county has LOW numbers, very few deaths, no where CLOSE to ever being overwhelmed but can't let facts get in way of CYA.. Irritated-you bet. Have talked with teacher friends and they are just as frustrated. My neighbor who teaches high school in a different district than they live in must now go 5 days a week yet still be there for her 6 year old to virtual school 3 days. Their only option now is to have grandparents help on the virtual school days. So tell me - exactly how does this help anyone? 100% complete and utter cluelessness and worse. Our city has mask mandate-surrounding areas with the 5 day in person school-nope no mask mandates. I wanna bop "leaders" heads together to make them use a weency bit of common sense.
 

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
yeah-like our district which sought parents input-overwhelmingly wanted to have 5 days a week in school. So district put together a plan with "community leaders, health experts, parents, teachers." We got option of hybrid or all virtual. Teachers were HANDED the plan and said "here it is" there was NO collaboration. Health commissioner is worthless (don't think he is smart enough to actually think beyond being swayed by latest news "reports" and certainly not facts). Developed by CEO's of the hospitals. One of which has a financial interest in hybrid as he is opening a new "child care center for working parents" on hospital campus. Same CEO who took advantage of grants/donations to finish out a floor in new tower for the "surge of covid patients"-that incidentally NEVER happened! Sat empty until finally a couple weeks ago decide to house the very few covid + together on that unit to make it easier on "doctor rounding" and I quote. New was starting to report more frequently on the "unused covid unit" too, and a major business provided a $1million dollar grant. That $1 million could have been used to open and revamp schools but nooooooooo......

Ohhh I can. No one wants to make a decision. No one wants to go against hysteria and instead go with facts because the media thrives on hysteria instead. Our county has LOW numbers, very few deaths, no where CLOSE to ever being overwhelmed but can't let facts get in way of CYA.. Irritated-you bet. Have talked with teacher friends and they are just as frustrated. My neighbor who teaches high school in a different district than they live in must now go 5 days a week yet still be there for her 6 year old to virtual school 3 days. Their only option now is to have grandparents help on the virtual school days. So tell me - exactly how does this help anyone? 100% complete and utter cluelessness and worse. Our city has mask mandate-surrounding areas with the 5 day in person school-nope no mask mandates. I wanna bop "leaders" heads together to make them use a weency bit of common sense.
I understand your frustration and other people’s also. Like I said, there is no magic thing we can do. For every teacher and parent and child I hear that wants to go back, there’s the other teachers, parents and students that don’t. I don’t know what the answer is besides, if it’s safe, whoever wants to go back, go but have in place something for others that don’t. It’s not fair for those that are worried, including teachers, to have to deal with something they don’t want to do. This is all new for everyone and we have to look at all solutions and figure it out.
I’m just going to sit on the sidelines and watch it play out.What is good for some doesn’t mean it’s good for all.
 
Last edited:

Kevin_W

Well-Known Member
I understand your frustration and other people’s also. Like I said, there is no magic thing we can do. For every teacher and parent and child I here that wants to go back, there’s the other teachers, parents and students that don’t. I don’t know what the answer is besides, if it’s safe, whoever wants to go back, go but have in place something for others that don’t. It’s not fair for those that are worried, including teachers, to have to deal with something they don’t want to do. This is all new for everyone and we have to look at all solutions and figure it out.
I’m just going to sit on the sidelines and watch it play out.What is good for some doesn’t mean it’s good for all.

Our school provide the option of hybrid school or complete remote schooling (for at least the first semester). 37% of the school took the remote option. But then they took the hybrid option away as well and those that picked hybrid will also by full remote, at least for a fwe weeks to start the year.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
Colleges are tough. They are doing their best but it’s going to be so hard to prevent outbreaks. Villanova is in my area and there were already some pictures of large crowds gathering on campus without masks or distancing. I think this was just Freshman orientation. I would be a hypocrite if I condemned the kids because I’m pretty sure if I were an 18 year old college student right now I would be in that crowd too. The one thing that may save the college year could be a fast ramp up of the quick saliva tests. Campuses could essentially create a mini version of the NBA bubble for students in dorms and in on campus housing. Just test them multiple times a week (or daily) and isolate the sick faster. It won’t prevent all spread but maybe it could prevent mass outbreaks. Most Universities can afford to do this and I think they would find most college students would be willing to submit to the testing if it meant a more close to normal experience.

It makes you think, lists say a young student gets it, most have little or no symptoms. They stay at campus and will not infect any at risk folks and will recover. For the rare student who has any problems, they would go to the Dr. or hospital like they would for any other problem that happens on campus, if it be for COVID or getting burned by a Bunsen burner.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
It makes you think, young student get it, most little or no symptoms. They stay at campus and will not infect any at risk folks and will recover. For the rare student who has any problems, they would go to the Dr. or hospital like they would for any other problem that happens on campus, if it be for COVID or getting burned by a Bunsen burner.
The problem is that a lot of campuses are in the middle of a community. So when the students who are infected go out to Starbucks in town or a restaurant or they work a part time job at the supermarket they spread it into the community. At campuses that are remote or isolated you could literally create a bubble and then test everyone going in and periodically if an outbreak ramps up. I know a person who’s daughter is going to a small University in New Hampshire where they are doing that. The student and her parents had to be tested before they could drop her off on campus and she signed an agreement saying she wouldn’t leave the campus and if she did would be re-tested and quarantine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom