News:

Welcome to the new (and now only) Fora!

Main Menu

Coronavirus

Started by bacardiandlime, January 30, 2020, 03:20:28 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

downer

Quote from: marshwiggle on June 26, 2020, 07:36:50 AM
Quote from: downer on June 26, 2020, 06:53:46 AM
Each year "1,825 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die from alcohol-related unintentional injuries". (Of course, who knows how accurate that claim is, but it is a standard one.)

It's clear that students will be safer this year because they won't be binge drinking at parties nearly as much. Overall, student deaths will go down this year. The risks of younger people dying from Coronavirus are very low.


The issue that needs to be considered is that institutions closed in the winter because of the risk, thereby acknowledging that

  • the risk is real
  • being on campus raises the risk significantly

Furthermore, the institutions bringing students back on campus are doing so based on the perceived value of the face-to-face experience. (For programs requiring actual hands-on experience, where being on campus is the only option, they have a reasonable case to make.)

So, the risk, even if mitigated somewhat by masks, distancing, etc., is being accepted based on the intangible value of the f2f experience. This is going to be really bad when students in first year are enticed on campus for the experience and then get sick and die. No parent is going to agree in retrospect that it was worth it. (On the other hand, students in some sort of health sciences field, who have to be on campus for practical experiences, which carry the kinds of risks that the actual profession would, are in a much different position.)

You say that's the issue. I'd say it's an issue, but the main game is risk reduction, and young people are at low risk.

Parents sending kids off to college already know that their kids are at risk for dying due to alcohol, drugs, car crashes, or suicide. They have continued to send their kids off to college despite this because they think it is a worthwhile risk. Now more than ever, having a college degree will be important for getting a job later on, and gives their kids something to do while there are no jobs. Colleges seem to be making calculations that they just need to make some effort to reduce risk to students. Many colleges seem to be rather unconcerned about risks to staff.

Students are good at transmitting the virus to others, as today's headline article in NYT shows. I'm mainly concerned about my own health.
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."—Sinclair Lewis

Penna

#646
Quote from: Hegemony on June 25, 2020, 11:08:32 PM
I get grocery delivery and I have not left the house to go to a store or see other people since early March.  I've been out for solo walks and for a few errands that don't involve other people, like putting my vote-by-mail ballot in the mailbox.

But among my friends, I see I am unusual. I am nonplussed at so many people going out for inessential reasons. Clearly they estimate the risks different than I do. I'm in several vulnerable categories, so my strategy for surviving is "Don't get the virus," rather than "Hope for the best."  I wouldn't set foot in a grocery store right now — well, for anything. Delivery is easy

This is pretty much where I am, except that I am not in any designated high-risk categories (I'm in my early 50s with none of the underlying conditions that are typically cited as high-risk).  I've just been a very risk-averse person all of my life, and also one who has always struggled with certain anxiety triggers, so I just know that I feel mentally much better keeping my personal risk levels to the absolute lowest they can be.  I get curbside pickup for groceries, drive-thru for Rx, and delivery for everything else. And other than than, I literally do not go out except to my campus office, but there is never anyone else in the building then.  And since I am married, I don't have the extra challenge of living alone during times when seeing other people will always involve some level of risk.

I live in an area where cases and hospitalizations have been rising significantly in recent weeks, though (drawing national attention), and am very worried about having to return to even a modified form of in-person instruction in the fall, even with a classroom mask mandate and a socially distanced classroom (via various "HyFlex" and hybrid approaches).  We'll see if my institution reverses course on its current plan or not.

The thing that gets me is the way that some of my fellow faculty talk about the situation at my institution.  It's clear that we are re-opening for in-person instruction due to the certain devastating financial impacts if we were to lose the revenue from residential room and board fees.  I get that, and of course I don't want my institution to possibly end up closing or experience mass layoffs either.  At my age and in my field, I seriously doubt I would ever be able to find another full-time position in academe again.

Yet I feel too many faculty are turning a blind eye to the real ethical issue behind our reopening:  yes, our institution might financially collapse and close if we stayed online-only (or mostly online, with allowances for lab/clinical and other types of necessarily "hands-on" types of classes).  Or at the very least, more people (including faculty) might lose their jobs (so far, only some lower-level staff members have been permanently laid off).

However, if we go ahead with reopening, and, at the end of the academic year, even just a few admin/faculty/staff/students have become seriously ill (potentially leaving them with lifelong health effects even if they recover, as some preliminary reporting suggests) and/or died from Covid, will the same people who seem to have the view that our institution has "no choice" but to run most classes with in-person instruction feel that the fact that the school remained open and no additional people lost their jobs was "worth it"?

evil_physics_witchcraft

Webex meetings. We are in for the biggest charlie foxtrot with the fall schedule. SMH.

ab_grp

Quote from: Hegemony on June 25, 2020, 11:08:32 PM
I get grocery delivery and I have not left the house to go to a store or see other people since early March.  I've been out for solo walks and for a few errands that don't involve other people, like putting my vote-by-mail ballot in the mailbox.

But among my friends, I see I am unusual. I am nonplussed at so many people going out for inessential reasons. Clearly they estimate the risks different than I do. I'm in several vulnerable categories, so my strategy for surviving is "Don't get the virus," rather than "Hope for the best."  I wouldn't set foot in a grocery store right now — well, for anything. Delivery is easy, and I can pay the delivery people a big tip because I'm certainly not spending money on anything else.  I also signed up for a nice weekly delivered farm share.  People say, "You can't live in fear." Well, I'm not living in fear, precisely because I'm staying home.

Our area is low in cases, but we went into phase 1 of opening up a couple of weeks ago. Sure enough there came a surge of cases. A few people having parties, and then the people infected at the parties being out and about (until they fell sick), was enough to get it going.

Like Penna, this is pretty much my situation.  We get everything delivered except for wine and beer, which we order through the local bar and pick up from the owner before they open (with everyone wearing masks).  We've been doing grocery delivery for about 2 years.  Tried it because of a free delivery coupon code and never went back.  It was great when husband had a heart attack last year, the after effects of which took up a lot of time and energy (he's good now).  But given his underlying condition and one of my own, we stay isolated.  Luckily, we enjoy being at home and have no real desire to go out.  I haven't left the house since medical tests in March that I didn't want to go to (but figured it wasn't going to get better out there in the near future) other than to drop off mail in the PO slot.  He has only gone out to go to work with full gear on, and he goes in on Sundays when only a skeleton crew is there.  I also feel that it's better to avoid getting it than hope it's mild if I do.  Plus, why take the risk of being on the road with people who can't even take the responsibility to wear masks in the grocery store? People here drive pretty badly to begin with.  I don't need to be in the hospital for any reason right now! I can understand people feeling antsy to get out, or maybe they want to take their chances.  I just am not, and I don't.  My elderly mother (a nurse), who is in a much hotter spot area, is extremely antsy and also does not want to wear a mask.  I can't control that, of course.  Many of my friends feel the same way she does.  My oldest daughter (also a nurse) moved to a new city during this and has a new guy she's dating out there, and they go to restaurants and etc.   Hopefully people do take reasonable precautions when they are out, but I just don't trust human nature enough to want to chance it.

Caracal

Quote from: ab_grp on June 26, 2020, 12:19:35 PM
Quote from: Hegemony on June 25, 2020, 11:08:32 PM
I get grocery delivery and I have not left the house to go to a store or see other people since early March.  I've been out for solo walks and for a few errands that don't involve other people, like putting my vote-by-mail ballot in the mailbox.

But among my friends, I see I am unusual. I am nonplussed at so many people going out for inessential reasons. Clearly they estimate the risks different than I do. I'm in several vulnerable categories, so my strategy for surviving is "Don't get the virus," rather than "Hope for the best."  I wouldn't set foot in a grocery store right now — well, for anything. Delivery is easy, and I can pay the delivery people a big tip because I'm certainly not spending money on anything else.  I also signed up for a nice weekly delivered farm share.  People say, "You can't live in fear." Well, I'm not living in fear, precisely because I'm staying home.

Our area is low in cases, but we went into phase 1 of opening up a couple of weeks ago. Sure enough there came a surge of cases. A few people having parties, and then the people infected at the parties being out and about (until they fell sick), was enough to get it going.

Like Penna, this is pretty much my situation.  We get everything delivered except for wine and beer, which we order through the local bar and pick up from the owner before they open (with everyone wearing masks).  We've been doing grocery delivery for about 2 years.  Tried it because of a free delivery coupon code and never went back.  It was great when husband had a heart attack last year, the after effects of which took up a lot of time and energy (he's good now).  But given his underlying condition and one of my own, we stay isolated.  Luckily, we enjoy being at home and have no real desire to go out.  I haven't left the house since medical tests in March that I didn't want to go to (but figured it wasn't going to get better out there in the near future) other than to drop off mail in the PO slot.  He has only gone out to go to work with full gear on, and he goes in on Sundays when only a skeleton crew is there.  I also feel that it's better to avoid getting it than hope it's mild if I do.  Plus, why take the risk of being on the road with people who can't even take the responsibility to wear masks in the grocery store? People here drive pretty badly to begin with.  I don't need to be in the hospital for any reason right now! I can understand people feeling antsy to get out, or maybe they want to take their chances.  I just am not, and I don't.  My elderly mother (a nurse), who is in a much hotter spot area, is extremely antsy and also does not want to wear a mask.  I can't control that, of course.  Many of my friends feel the same way she does.  My oldest daughter (also a nurse) moved to a new city during this and has a new guy she's dating out there, and they go to restaurants and etc.   Hopefully people do take reasonable precautions when they are out, but I just don't trust human nature enough to want to chance it.

That's perfectly reasonable, given your life situation and health risks. However, it isn't as workable for everyone. We have a young kid and being stuck at home with him for two months was brutal. He's now back in daycare which is good for him. Hopefully we'll all remain healthy. I've been trying to move into finding a version of life I can manage for the long haul. We've seen some friends at an appropriate distance outside, which did a lot for my mental health. We've started doing things like going to swimming places where it is possible to keep your distance. It seems clear that all of this stuff is pretty low risk and the reward is pretty high.

We are still doing pick up of groceries and if places have a pick up outside option. I'm doing that on the principle that I may as well avoid even low risk things when it is easy to do so. I'm certainly not going to go eat at a restaurant anytime soon or go to the gym or do other non-essential high risk things.

Hegemony

I see a lot of magical thinking and looking for exceptions amongst my friends & acquaintances.

One friend: "Oh, I am not going out at all! I mean, I go to the grocery, but only once a week. And I went to the eye doctor for my annual checkup, and to my massage person because I really feel a lot better if I get a massage. And I didn't want to look completely feral so I got my hair cut and my mani/pedi. Then I had my church choir over for lunch but we all sat outside and only Annabel sang." 

(And I'm thinking, that's like a dozen contacts in one week!)

Another friend: "I'm not taking chances, I'm only seeing family. I see Bob's crew because he's my brother and they're his family, and then my niece and her husband, and her mother-in-law because she's over a lot, and then my kids and their spouses, but apart from that I'm not seeing anybody."

(Logical flaw: If I know them well, they won't be infected with the virus.)

Another friend: "I wouldn't see anybody who had any symptoms! I only hang out with people who are healthy."

(Logical flaw: You're assuming the symptoms are severe, or correctly identified, or that they're not infectious but asymptomatic.)

Everybody in general: "This virus is here to stay! We'll all get it sometime!  You can't live in fear!"

(My response: Well, we'll see. If I have to get it, I'd rather take the risk way down the road, when we know more about how it behaves and about treating it.)

Other people in general: "If you want to stay home, stay home! You do you. I'm not living in fear!"

(My response: Ah, good old American individualism — every man for himself. No wonder we're such a public-health catastrophe.)

ab_grp

Caracal, I do understand that others make different choices, so I'm sorry if I sounded a bit strident.  Part of that is just due to stress over some family members who are taking a trip this weekend that seems really risky to me.  In any case, a friend of mine is in a similar position to yours.  She has a two year old, and both she and her spouse have had to try to balance their work and stimulating their daughter for months.  She was just able to get her daughter back into a small day care last week, which has been a tremendous relief.  If my kids were here during this thing they'd probably be bored to death, and that would certainly make staying in less enjoyable! Plus, I get that for some it's just not tenable to stay in as much as we do.  We are fortunate to be able to work mostly remotely (well, I am now a lady of leisure or "between jobs" I guess thanks to the economy, but I worked fully remotely until a month ago).  There also isn't much open to go to around here.  But although many people like you are trying to get out and about safely, there are others who don't seem to want to take any precautions at all.  That seems to me to ruin things for everyone.  But I can appreciate that everyone needs to find their own risk-reward balance, which depends a lot on their circumstances (including location).

Hegemony, I hear the same kinds of things.  Especially when folks I know say they are only seeing a few people here and there (and not in a safely distanced way because it's only a few), including family, I wonder who those people they're seeing had been in contact with, etc.  I am guilty of that kind of thinking myself in other situations, though.  Again, maybe human nature, but some of the situations I hear about really don't make sense to me.   

spork

Quote from: downer on June 26, 2020, 08:27:32 AM

[. . .]

Parents sending kids off to college already know that their kids are at risk for dying due to alcohol, drugs, car crashes, or suicide. They have continued to send their kids off to college despite this because they think it is a worthwhile risk.

[. . . ]

Well . . . actually people are generally very bad at thinking probabilistically and they tend to suffer from optimism bias. A lot of parents think that universities have the legal and moral obligation to create completely risk-free environments for their little Joshuas and Madisons.

Quote from: evil_physics_witchcraft on June 26, 2020, 09:17:30 AM
Webex meetings. We are in for the biggest charlie foxtrot with the fall schedule. SMH.

Yes, same here. IT keeps pushing Webex as the cure for all evils. Every week faculty hear that Webex is pushing out new features and bug fixes. And just last week we heard that Microsoft videoconferencing is "rapidly gaining ground." Meanwhile Zoom already does in a click or two what these companies are promising.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

Stockmann

QuoteEverybody in general: "This virus is here to stay! We'll all get it sometime!  You can't live in fear!"

(My response: Well, we'll see. If I have to get it, I'd rather take the risk way down the road, when we know more about how it behaves and about treating it.)

This. The longer you delay getting it, the better the chances of effective treatments being available - already there is a little more than can be done than there was until recently. Even if there is no further progress, you're better off getting it when your location is well past the peak than near the peak, because the system won't be so overwhelmed. If you delay getting it enough, there might be a vaccine available, in which case you might avoid getting it altogether, or at least ensure you get a mild version. Worst case scenario, no vaccine and no further drugs, if you hold out long enough eventually herd immunity will develop - no pandemic has ever not gone down substantially eventually, even if it's only because of all the more susceptible people dying off and evolutionary pressures on the pathogen itself.

Non-US location here - testing rates are pretty low, and there are various other issues with the figures, so we only have a very crude idea of how bad the situation here is. That adds more uncertainty, and more reason to use the ancient methods of prevention. As I've said earlier, my biggest worry isn't really me or anyone else in my household dying of covid, my biggest worry is my wife and I becoming too ill to care for the baby. It's not a binary swift-death-or-asymptomatic thing, which is something a lot of people seem to forget.

Caracal

Quote from: ab_grp on June 26, 2020, 01:53:16 PM
Caracal, I do understand that others make different choices, so I'm sorry if I sounded a bit strident.  Part of that is just due to stress over some family members who are taking a trip this weekend that seems really risky to me.  In any case, a friend of mine is in a similar position to yours.  She has a two year old, and both she and her spouse have had to try to balance their work and stimulating their daughter for months.  She was just able to get her daughter back into a small day care last week, which has been a tremendous relief.  If my kids were here during this thing they'd probably be bored to death, and that would certainly make staying in less enjoyable! Plus, I get that for some it's just not tenable to stay in as much as we do.  We are fortunate to be able to work mostly remotely (well, I am now a lady of leisure or "between jobs" I guess thanks to the economy, but I worked fully remotely until a month ago).  There also isn't much open to go to around here.  But although many people like you are trying to get out and about safely, there are others who don't seem to want to take any precautions at all.  That seems to me to ruin things for everyone.


Yes, certainly lots of people not trying at all around here too. On one hand you have lots of spread from people who don't have much choice about going into work in unsafe conditions, but you also just see a lot of people who can't seem to be bothered. It's frustrating because there's actually a lot that can be done pretty safely.

nebo113

Quote from: downer on June 26, 2020, 06:53:46 AM
Each year "1,825 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die from alcohol-related unintentional injuries". (Of course, who knows how accurate that claim is, but it is a standard one.)

It's clear that students will be safer this year because they won't be binge drinking at parties nearly as much. Overall, student deaths will go down this year. The risks of younger people dying from Coronavirus are very low.

The issue regarding health is much more serious for college employees, especially those in the older age groups.

Binge drinking students don't generally pass binge drinking along to their parents and grandparents.

downer

Quote from: nebo113 on June 27, 2020, 04:52:23 AM
Quote from: downer on June 26, 2020, 06:53:46 AM
Each year "1,825 college students between the ages of 18 and 24 die from alcohol-related unintentional injuries". (Of course, who knows how accurate that claim is, but it is a standard one.)

It's clear that students will be safer this year because they won't be binge drinking at parties nearly as much. Overall, student deaths will go down this year. The risks of younger people dying from Coronavirus are very low.

The issue regarding health is much more serious for college employees, especially those in the older age groups.

Binge drinking students don't generally pass binge drinking along to their parents and grandparents.

That's my point. The concern should not be particularly about students dying from corona virus, because probably few will -- it should be about them acting as spreaders of the virus, and how it will impact older people, including university faculty and staff.
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."—Sinclair Lewis

marshwiggle

Quote from: downer on June 27, 2020, 05:07:59 AM

That's my point. The concern should not be particularly about students dying from corona virus, because probably few will -- it should be about them acting as spreaders of the virus, and how it will impact older people, including university faculty and staff.

I can't recall whether it's a local statistic, or more general, but about 30% of the covid infections are among healthcare workers. Consider:

  • Healthcare workers (generally) have proper PPE.
  • Healthcare workers have formal training in the proper use of PPE.
  • Healthcare facilities have lots of infrastructure and protocols for disinfection.

The reason healthcare workers get infected, despite all of those things, is their exposure to infected people.  Once students get on campus, without any of those things, the infection rate of people exposed will be much higher.

In other words, when there are outbreaks on campus, they will be big.
It takes so little to be above average.

polly_mer

Quote from: spork on June 26, 2020, 02:05:08 PM
Quote from: evil_physics_witchcraft on June 26, 2020, 09:17:30 AM
Webex meetings. We are in for the biggest charlie foxtrot with the fall schedule. SMH.

Yes, same here. IT keeps pushing Webex as the cure for all evils. Every week faculty hear that Webex is pushing out new features and bug fixes. And just last week we heard that Microsoft videoconferencing is "rapidly gaining ground." Meanwhile Zoom already does in a click or two what these companies are promising.

I regularly use Zoom, Webex, and Skype.

The primary differences I notice are the variety of equipment people are using to connect and how much bandwidth they have. 

A crummy mic on a smart phone that is held at arm's length at a random height is much more of a problem than which software is involved.

Connecting from the hinterlands and trying to share video that is irrelevant (the Brady Bunch boxes) instead of calling in via phone for a much better connection for a discussion that can be completely without visuals is my current biggest pet peeve.
Quote from: hmaria1609 on June 27, 2019, 07:07:43 PM
Do whatever you want--I'm just the background dancer in your show!

Cheerful

Quote from: polly_mer on June 27, 2020, 10:50:41 AM
I regularly use Zoom, Webex, and Skype.

The primary differences I notice are the variety of equipment people are using to connect and how much bandwidth they have. 

A crummy mic on a smart phone that is held at arm's length at a random height is much more of a problem than which software is involved.

Connecting from the hinterlands and trying to share video that is irrelevant (the Brady Bunch boxes) instead of calling in via phone for a much better connection for a discussion that can be completely without visuals is my current biggest pet peeve.

+1   And Zoom is overrated.