BP - COVID19 Uptick in Connection w/ Wedding?

gamanit

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 2:02 pm

ora_43 wrote:

You have no idea what viral load you'll get, though. In the situation you describe, you could either be exposed to so little of the virus that you don't get sick - or they could sneeze and suddenly you're exposed to way more than you wanted.

True. It's a gamble. It's also a gamble not to get covid now and risk getting covid and flu at the same time later on. My friend lost her father to flu and pneumonia at the same time. He was a young healthy person. Flu can be deadly especially when combined with another deadly virus at the same time.

amother

Burgundy

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 2:16 pm

PinkFridge wrote:

You might want to read this essay: What it's like to send your wife to Mars
https://www.rd.com/article/send-wife-mars/

Oh my, it never dawned on me that I can leave my husband down below.
Neh forget it, he’d never manage, ill just take him.

PinkFridge

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 3:56 pm

gamanit wrote:

Covid is
1. being recognized as a threat earlier. As opposed to back in March where as a doctor just told me today, she had a patient wait 3 hours, with 104, for a test, and was turned away
2. being treated more effectively
3. not something to invite. There is the mandate of venishmartem. I would say that that means avoiding it rather than making cheshbonos about the pros of getting it earlier.

ra_mom

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 4:56 pm

NY allows 50 people at indoor gatherings. This discussion is about NY. Why would you say that up to 250 is legal?

Mothers

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 4:57 pm

gamanit wrote:

You can take a flu shot (as they are recommending) to reduce the chances of contracting the flu and/or the incidence of complications (e.g. pneumonia).

Amarante

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 4:58 pm

gamanit wrote:

The percentage of people in the hospital compared to the number of sick is far lower. I guess by reputable medical sources you mean those that agree with you... See below from the CDC website and compare the number of hospitalized patients to the number of positive tests.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru......html

This doesn't correlate to the cases being less severe in the summer as opposed to the winter. At the beginning, they didn't have any effective treatments and some of the stuff they did like early ventilator protocol was actually dangerous.

Any prudent person would put off getting the disease if possible - or at least for as long as possible. Treatments continue to improve and there might be a vaccine.

I based my response on your stating that it was somehow better to get it now and deliberately expose oneself in the hope of getting it because somehow the virus is less dangerous now but will be MORE dangerous for some reason in the winter.

There is no reliable science study which says that or recommends that anyone deliberately expose themselves now because their case will be less severe.

There are early studies which indicate that viral load might be the reason why some people have less severe cases which means that masks are helpful. But there are also studies postulating some exposure to other Corona viruses in the past give some people partial immunity.

gamanit

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 4:59 pm

Mothers wrote:

You can take a flu shot (as they are recommending) to reduce the chances of contracting the flu and/or the incidence of complications (e.g. pneumonia).

Pop quiz. How effective is the flu shot? As most of us know not very.

gamanit

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 5:00 pm

Amarante wrote:

Better treatments in hospitals wouldn't prevent hospitalization in the first place. The converse is actually true as people were avoiding hospitals in April since they viewed them as death traps. Of course there are no studies about this yet; hasn't been long enough.

monkeymamma

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 5:06 pm

Upstate NY wedding with 175 guests can proceed despite COVID-19, judge rules

An upstate wedding with 175 on the guest list can go forward this weekend, despite a coronavirus mandate that limits nuptial gatherings to just 50 people, a judge ruled Wednesday.

Pamella Giglia and Joe Durolek filed suit last month, alongside since-married couple Jenna DiMartile and Justin Crawford, claiming that Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s executive order limiting social gatherings to 50 people or less has been unfairly applied while protests, graduations and restaurants have all seen much larger groups.

They also claimed the order violated their First and 14th Amendment rights in not allowing them to carry out a religious wedding according to their conscience and beliefs.

DiMartile and Crawford’s wedding was allowed to proceed on Aug. 7 after the judge ruled in their favor just minutes before DiMartile walked down the aisle at the Sterling at Arrowhead Golf Club in Akron with around 115 guests looking on.

But following federal Judge Glenn Suddaby’s decision, the state filed an appeal and then asked Suddaby to hold off the Aug. 22 Giglia-Durolek wedding — which is also set to take place at the Arrowhead Golf Club — until the appellate court ruled.

Suddaby denied the motion for a stay, saying, “Although the public certainly does have an interest in preventing the spread of COVID-19, the public also has an interest in having constitutional rights protected and not unduly infringed by unchecked government action.”

Suddaby also noted that the guests at both weddings were and are required to wear masks and social distance when they aren’t seated at their own table — which the Arrowhead and “24 of the core attendees at the Giglia-Durolek wedding have sworn that they will comply with,” the decision read.

But the state argued that weddings are riskier than regular restaurant dining for a myriad of reasons including that guests stay longer, they have more interaction with more people, the guests come and go roughly at the same time and wedding guests are less likely to comply with mask-wearing and social distancing.

Indeed, Health Commissioner Howard Zucker said in a declaration in the case that the upcoming wedding could be a “super-spreader” of the coronavirus.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday that an uptick in coronavirus cases in Borough Park, Brooklyn, was most likely linked to a recent large-scale wedding.

Despite the promise by Giglia and Durolek, their officiant, 21 of their guests and the venue to comply with indoor dining restrictions at restaurants, “the State defendants have continued to assume non-compliance based on the nature of the event as a wedding, without a rational basis,” Suddaby wrote in the decision.

“We are not looking for New York State to rewrite the rules, just apply them fairly,” the couples’ lawyer Chad Davenport told The Post.

Cuomo spokeswoman Caitlin Girouard emphasized that the decision only applies to these two particular weddings, while other weddings must still follow state guidelines.

“We are appealing the August 7th decision as it risks public health and endangers the progress New York has made in maintaining one of the lowest infection rates in the country while cases are surging across the country,” Girouard said.

“In the meantime, we will continue enforcing state guidance limiting large, non-essential gatherings to 50 people.” https://nypost.com/2020/08/20/.....80127

Mothers

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 5:15 pm

gamanit wrote:

Pop quiz. How effective is the flu shot? As most of us know not very.

Even when it is not effective at preventing the flu - it is effective at reducing complications from the flu. That is why it is worth taking - even if they guess wrong about the strain. . .

Amarante

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 5:17 pm

Mothers wrote:

Even when it is not effective at preventing the flu - it is effective at reducing complications from the flu. That is why it is worth taking - even if they guess wrong about the strain. . .

It's also effective as a public health measure since it would limit those who have the flu and therefore decrease odds of coming into contact with someone.

My odds have been really good - get the shot as does my family and never had flu - K/H

amother

Smokey

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 8:45 pm

amother [ cornflower ] wrote:

Where is this legal?

In NJ it was legal to have an indoor gathering of 250 people they lowered it to 50 people but put an exception on weddings, funerals, religious gatherings and political gatherings

Supermom#1

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 10:15 pm

amother [ Smokey ] wrote:

FYI covid is going rampant all over the mountains in every colony and in every camp. Idk why you dont see it on yehsiva world etc

FYI that's baloney. You're probably not in the catskills cuz clearly, you have no idea what's going on. (to the nitpickers out there, there are some cases but it's certainly NOT RAMPANT and NOT in every colony and camp. How ludicrous.)

amother

Smokey

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 10:34 pm

Supermom#1 wrote:

Should I start naming colonies and camps I know for certain its in?

amother

Aubergine

Thu, Aug 20 2020, 11:44 pm

Its definitely going around again and not everyone is getting it mildly. My next door neighbors daughter came home from going away to camp this week with flu like symotons and just tested positive for the virus.
Its foolish to think its gone

PinkFridge

Fri, Aug 21 2020, 9:21 am

amother [ Aubergine ] wrote:

I hope kids are being careful not to go near grandparents right away.

amother

Crimson

Fri, Aug 21 2020, 9:24 am

No one is saying it is gone. We are saying the situation is better B"H. Regardless we do have to find a way to live with it in the meantime. It is not all or nothing.
People cannot nor should lock down forever. B"H lockdown is not warranted. We know more and things are better than initially looked B"H.

amother

Oak

Fri, Aug 21 2020, 10:02 am

amother [ Crimson ] wrote:

I disagree that no one is saying it is gone. Lots of people are saying it is gone and behaving as if it's pre-Purim 2020.

I do agree that it isn't all or nothing, which is why there are protocols, requirements, recommendations, guidelines, etc.: SD, wearing masks, not having large gatherings, trying to do smaller outdoor gatherings where SD and masks, etc. can be practiced. And then, maybe we learn more about how or when to be less strict/more strict. But waiting for it to get like March 2020 again will be too late...that's the mistake many many jewish leaders and communities made back then.

It seems that many don't feel it's necessary or feel it's too inconvenient to do that, but those are the ways to not be in lockdown safely, so they have hundreds at indoor weddings, without SD, without masks, sharing communal food, dancing holding hands and singing...again, like it's pre-Purim 2020.

We are all willing to suffer lots of inconveniences in the name of many mitzvos, but it seems protecting our health and ahavas yisroel are just not worth it. (How many times am I hearing: elderly or immunocompromised, just stay home and consider quitting your jobs?)

NotInNJMommy

Sun, Aug 23 2020, 3:46 pm

monkeymamma wrote:

NY couple loses appeal, postpones 175-guest wedding over Cuomo COVID rules
By Priscilla DeGregory
A couple has postponed their upstate New York wedding with a guest list of 175 following an appeals court ruling Friday that would limit their nuptial celebration to just 50 people amid coronavirus pandemic rules.

Pamella Giglia and Joe Durolek filed suit last month, alongside since-married couple Jenna DiMartile and Justin Crawford, claiming that Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s executive order limiting social gatherings to 50 people or less has been unfairly applied while protests, graduations and restaurants have all seen much larger groups gather.

They claimed it also violated their constitutional right to conduct a religious wedding according to their beliefs.

Giglia and Durolek had a wedding scheduled for this Saturday at the Sterling at Arrowhead Golf Club in Akron, but the pair postponed tying the knot following the appeals court ruling that would limit them to only 50 guests, their lawyer told The Post.

A lower court judge first allowed DiMartile and Crawford’s wedding — with around 115 guests — to proceed on Aug. 7 — a ruling also in Giglia and Durolek’s favor.

But then the state appealed that decision and asked for a stay of the ruling — which if they won would essentially halt the Giglia-Durolek wedding — pending appeal. The lower court judge denied the stay Wednesday.

Then, Second Circuit appeals court Judge Denny Chin Friday granted the state’s request to stay the lower court judge’s ruling until the next available three-judge appeals court panel can hear the case — as Chin apparently thought the couples’ brought their case too late.

“Plaintiffs-Appellees did not seek to challenge the application of the Executive Order limiting gatherings to 50 people until just a few days before the first of the scheduled weddings,” Chin wrote in the decision.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Chad Davenport, said the final appeals court decision could come as early as Tuesday or Wednesday.

“Our couple obviously is disappointed with today’s decision, and they have decided to postpone their wedding until a final decision from the Second Circuit is issued, possibly as early as next Saturday, August 29, 2020,” Davenport said.

Cuomo’s office did not immediately return a request for comment.

Additional reporting by Bernadette Hogan

https://nypost.com/2020/08/21/.....rder/

chestnut

Sun, Aug 23 2020, 4:43 pm

gamanit wrote:

We do know quite a bit actually. It's actually quite logical. Let's say 90% of a population is immune. One person comes from out of town where there's a current outbreak and is an asymptomatic carrier. There's a wedding where 500 people attend. 50 of them are vulnerable and can get sick. Those 50 though are mostly only exposing people who are already immune so it fizzles out pretty fast. Let's not work ourselves into a panic needlessly here. Yes, people who aren't immune yet should be taking precautions when attending weddings or other large gatherings (I.e. properly fitted mask, don't get too close to anyone, etc.). I don't understand why people don't take the quarantine after travelling from out of town seriously. That is the biggest issue at the moment. Unfortunately, you always have to assume that there will be people not following the rules.

Having some people losing immunity isn't really a cause for concern because that happens with every virus. Even with measles which usually generates a very strong long-lasting immune response there are some people who lose their immunity very quickly. This isn't surprising at all. I don't understand why people don't take the quarantine after travelling from out of town seriously. That is the biggest issue at the moment.

Your math is wrong from the beginning. There's no way that 90% of BP or Brooklyn or tri state frum residents have immunity. Many didn't have covid, not to mention those who had it Purim/pesach time being sick now (with an in between negative tests or antibodies)