Do you think that Disney world will reclose its gates due to the rising number of COVID cases in Florida and around the country?

mellyf

Active Member
You’re 100000% right. The CDC guidance is a joke. My wife is a 6th grade teacher, and she laughed out loud at the recommendations. However, she also knows school needs to be open, and held in person. It’s not even up for debate. Do the best we can, and teach the kids, not having school will have incalculable negative ramification. We simply can’t afford to go down that road as a country.

And I respect your opinion. I think there could be other ramifications w/ full steam ahead that could end up affecting students even more negatively, but we'll have to agree to disagree.
 

legwand77

Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, I will try to stop after this, but I've been teaching a long time. I've got a pretty good handle on discipline, but to talk about "better control in a classroom" especially when you're talking about very young children (ex Kindergarten/1st grade), some of those children have multiple daily meltdowns in the best of times. I teach 5th grade, and I love it. They're my people and I want to be with them. But even at 10/11 years of age, many children have impulse control issues. They're KIDS. To think of them as little soldiers, sitting quietly behind their plexiglass divider is ludicrous. And I'll be surprised if my district (or "most" districts) have plexiglass dividers around every desk. My classroom won't fit 20 children with 6 feet of distancing. I don't have desks in my room, I have tables because we like the sense of community. It's possible that each child could have their own trapezoid table. I have a dozen of them, but from what I understand, most of our classrooms will only be able to 8 or 9 students w/ appropriate distancing. The guidelines that schools are trying to deal with make no sense to anyone with an understanding of what an actual classroom with real live students involves.

And I'm not sure what is going to happen when a teacher needs to take a sick day or take his/her child to a Dr's appointment. I can't imagine that getting a substitute is even going to be an option. Subs are already in very short supply, and I can't imagine that many are going to want to into a situation like this.
I totally agree with you , the cdc guidelines are very unpractical and will not work in the real world classroom.
 

Phil12

Well-Known Member
You’re 100000% right. The CDC guidance is a joke. My wife is a 6th grade teacher, and she laughed out loud at the recommendations. However, she also knows school needs to be open, and held in person. It’s not even up for debate. Do the best we can, and teach the kids, not having school will have incalculable negative ramification. We simply can’t afford to go down that road as a country.
I think that most children would benefit from taking a year off from school. Younger children could be required to watch an hour of Sesame Street each day while older children could watch the Joy of Painting, Rick Steve's Europe and Jeopardy each day. They could also get extra credit by watching Wheel of Fortune.
 

havoc315

Well-Known Member
I said (or meant) they never recommended school closures as part of their guidance. They did provide a tree to follow if local communities wanted to put closures on the table. Maybe worded poorly on my end.

what you left out was all the other information the CDC provided around schools like the available modeling as an example. Not to mention their current stance. And the stance of the AAP.

And you can point to the stances of many other public health organizations on State, Federal and international levels that do recommend school closings.

Now notice -- all the CDC guidelines talk about taking measures whenever a positive case is identified in the school.

Here are some highlights from their current website recommendations:

schools can determine, in collaboration with state and local health officials to the extent possible, whether and how to implement these considerations while adjusting to meet the unique needs and circumstances of the local community. Implementation should be guided by what is feasible, practical, acceptable, and tailored to the needs of each community.

[hmm, as I said -- should be guided by the individual needs of the community, just like I said..]

Lowest Risk: Students and teachers engage in virtual-only classes, activities, and events.
[hmm... so the current CDC guidelines continue to recognize virtual-only classes]

Staff and students who have recently had close contact with a person with COVID-19 should also stay home and monitor their health.

[
Now bear with me -- If you have wide community spread, then you can't have school without close contact. If you have a school with 200 students, and 10 of them just tested positive for Covid... that means virtually every student and teacher in the school likely had close contact and will need to isolate. This just happened in my own school district -- they had a graduation with social distancing. 2 people then tested positive, having brought the virus back from Florida. As a result, per the CDC guidelines -- the 300 people who attended the graduation were directed to quarantine for 2 weeks. 19 subsequently tested positive for Covid]

[Now again, if you have wide community spread -- meaning lots of infections being detected on a daily basis.. that means you'd have to be constantly closing huge chunks of the school for 24 hours of disinfecting. Go back to the very first statement -- about implementation should be based on what is "feasible and practical" -- If you have wide community spread, then in-person is simply not practical and feasible]

Inform those who have had close contact with a person diagnosed with COVID-19 to stay home and self-monitor for symptoms, and follow CDC guidance if symptoms develop.


[
Once again, if you have wide community spread -- then open in-person schools would put EVERYONE in close contact with Covid individuals, meaning everyone would constantly be told to stay home]
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Deaths are declining nationwide.

Unfortunately that may no longer be the case. I've been trying not to overcall it, but Florida has been trending up for a solid week along with several other states to varying degrees. A lot of the declines from the North East have covered for poor trends in most other states. Hence "Nationwide" still looked ok.

However - today Nationwide is the highest reported death toll in a month. Hopefully an anomaly.
 

havoc315

Well-Known Member
Unfortunately that may no longer be the case. I've been trying not to overcall it, but Florida has been trending up for a solid week along with several other states to varying degrees. A lot of the declines from the North East have covered for poor trends in most other states. Hence "Nationwide" still looked ok.

However - today Nationwide is the highest reported death toll in a month. Hopefully an anomaly.

You can't just based on today or the last few days: The last few days were especially light because of the holiday weekend. Today may have been especially heavy due to the backlog from the holiday weekend.

I do get a sense that things might be starting to trend upward in deaths. Deaths are definitely up by some degree in some states. But nationwide especially, don't reach too much into today. Step back... wait a few days, even wait a week. Then take a look.

I do *expect* 100 deaths+ per day to become the norm for a while in Florida, California, Texas..... but I'll fully admit I don't really know. Pure educated speculation -- I do think we will be back to 1,000 deaths per day nationwide by the end of the month, but I doubt we are going back to the 3,000 per day peak. At least I really really hope not.
 

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
You can't just based on today or the last few days: The last few days were especially light because of the holiday weekend. Today may have been especially heavy due to the backlog from the holiday weekend.

Of course, but the 7 day rolling average increased today Nationwide (which include the full breadth of the holiday weekend). It may very well be an anomalous figure and the rest of the week will slowly course correct.

The trends in selected states have been ongoing for at least a week. I was more so talking about those; Texas, Florida, Arizona. That eventually will translate to the Nationwide figure unless they stop.
 

xdan0920

Think for yourselfer
I posted this in the other thread, but I’ll leave it here too. Florida’s positivity rate is bunk.


We know that not all of the local negatives are being reported because UF reports the results of its employee testing here; we log that number on a spreadsheet when it changes, and the number of total tests increased by 3,527 from July 4 to today (with only one positive test). Over that same period, the state reported an increase of 1,423 tests (with 195 positive tests).

That means that the official positivity rate for those three days was 13.7%, but when you add the unreported negatives from UF, it becomes 3.9% (and that’s only adding the negatives we know about; there are almost certainly others). That paints a very different picture of community spread.

 

chrisvee

Well-Known Member
In the end, mathematical models will be used to study the true number of deaths. I completely agree the numbers will be revised in retrospect. But in most cases (if not all cases), the numbers of death will be increased dramatically. We are missing lots of deaths.

Now, the number of actual infections will also be increased dramatically... already seeing it.... so the death *rate* may indeed be downgraded. But the total number of deaths will be increased significantly.

yes, this is what will happen. hello regression analysis! so that we can understand potentially how off the death registries might be.
 

techgeek

Well-Known Member
I posted this in the other thread, but I’ll leave it here too. Florida’s positivity rate is bunk.





They seem to be using county-specific numbers here, and are just referring to Alachua county cases and testing... unless I'm confused. I'm trying to follow their math. Both positivity and community spread have been significantly lower in Alachua compared to the state overall and to the hotspots.

Personally I take any and all of the Florida numbers with a healthy dose of skepticism. I think they are all bunk, in some fashion, due to county by county issues in reporting like this one appears to be. However, I don't think the trends they represent are bunk. I tend to believe the errors are relatively consistent, at least, so when the graph goes north on a number and the slope of the line is alarming... that's something to express concern about. By any measure, positivity continues to be at a significantly higher rate than it was a month ago.
 

techgeek

Well-Known Member
The more likely reason POs have been cut/scaled back are that Disney doesn't know what to expect and margins are so poor that they can't afford to risk a mistake. Also, I'd assume all businesses that got burned with excess inventory during the initial shutdown have rethought their buying strategies. I don't think anyone will be keeping a ton of product/supply on hand, if they can even get it with all the supply chain issues, for the foreseeable future.
If possible. Need permission from the source and info on what I have to omit in order to keep the source unknown.

It could be an interesting piece of the puzzle, but I'm with @coasterphil that unless it's a collection of systemic PO's representing the entire property... it would be expected that individual buyers and management teams will be playing tight with inventory given the unknowns.

I don't really think a closure will be 'planned' in advance anyway. Word is going to come from the very top (Josh and/or Bob), triggered by whatever metric or decision making process they have established, and there will be days warning just like last time.. not weeks, and likely not an inventory cycle's worth of warning, even if it's PO's for fresh food products.
 

chrisvee

Well-Known Member
I posted this in the other thread, but I’ll leave it here too. Florida’s positivity rate is bunk.

Ok, so from July 4th to July 6th, the Alachua Chronicle recorded the changed totals for all employees on the UF website and compared them to the reported lab numbers in FL’s state reports. I don’t think they stated how they knew all the labs doing testing for UF.

And the AC concluded that because they didn’t match, some labs must not be reporting negatives. Even though at least two labs are. And we know that FL has a disclaimer on the lab results that says that the sum of the numbers is higher than the number of people tested due to multiple tests at different labs with potentially different results. The AC also didn’t disclose how they knew the website update occurred on the same day as the state reports.

The AC then concluded that labs reporting 100% positive must also be failing to report negatives as well. Not sure what facts support that. But they don’t think that reporting 100% negatives means a failure to report positives?

Maybe they are onto something but their investigative and analytical methods are...unconvincing.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom