universities ignored the modeling and science: IHE article

Started by polly_mer, August 26, 2020, 05:20:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

spork

I know of at least one university that built its Covid-19 mitigation plan around defining "contact" as "more than 15 minutes within 6 feet of someone who is not masked." This way students (and instructors) who have shared a classroom with someone who tests positive don't have to quarantine.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

FishProf

That is a special kind of stupid.  It seems to willfully misinterpret the CDC definitions.

"For COVID-19, a close contact is defined as any individual who was within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting from 2 days before illness onset (or, for asymptomatic patients, 2 days prior to positive specimen collection) until the time the patient is isolated."
I'd rather have questions I can't answer, than answers I can't question.

Aster

One of my colleagues is at a university where CDC guidelines are being strictly followed for lecture classes, but the laboratory classes have had the social distancing guidelines self-waived by the university. Students are working alongside one another in groups still and sharing equipment with each other, albeit with masks and (sometimes) gloves on.

I guess that laboratory courses at this university have some innate immunity against the close-contact spreading and contracting of coronavirus. They're putting a lot of faith into those masks. And yet, the lecture classes are carefully observing social distancing, assigned seating, one-way traffic... all the CDC recommendations. It's very puzzling why lecture courses are being treated with full safety precautions, while laboratory classes are not.

polly_mer

Quote from: Aster on September 03, 2020, 08:23:09 AM
It's very puzzling why lecture courses are being treated with full safety precautions, while laboratory classes are not.
<jokey comment follows>

The humanities-educated administrators are quietly making their strategic move against the STEM folks using science.
Quote from: hmaria1609 on June 27, 2019, 07:07:43 PM
Do whatever you want--I'm just the background dancer in your show!

Caracal

Quote from: FishProf on September 03, 2020, 08:03:06 AM
That is a special kind of stupid.  It seems to willfully misinterpret the CDC definitions.

"For COVID-19, a close contact is defined as any individual who was within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting from 2 days before illness onset (or, for asymptomatic patients, 2 days prior to positive specimen collection) until the time the patient is isolated."

In the wider community, that definition makes sense as a practical matter-you want to focus on the people most likely to have been infected. The logic doesn't work as well in classrooms where we know exactly who was in the room with that person.

Based on the data, universities have reported, it doesn't seem like there has been much spread in classrooms. I haven't seen any reported clusters from classes and the number of cases among faculty and staff seem pretty low overall, basically consistent with the rate in the community. I remain very wary of indoor spaces and don't have any desire to teach in person. That said, it wouldn't be all that surprising if classrooms were relatively low risk if everyone is wearing masks, the rooms are large enough and everyone keeps their distance.


FishProf

Quote from: Caracal on September 03, 2020, 12:45:38 PM
That said, it wouldn't be all that surprising if classrooms were relatively low risk if everyone is wearing masks, the rooms are large enough and everyone keeps their distance.

Depends on way too many factors to make such a blanket statement.  How long are they in the room?  How big is the room?  Windows that can/are open?  Air circulation?  Turnover rate?  Mode of teaching?  Lectures? Discussions? Group sing-alongs?

My 3-hr lab with discussions and activities is not the same as a 50-min lecture in the large hall.
I'd rather have questions I can't answer, than answers I can't question.

Caracal

Quote from: FishProf on September 04, 2020, 06:49:33 AM
Quote from: Caracal on September 03, 2020, 12:45:38 PM
That said, it wouldn't be all that surprising if classrooms were relatively low risk if everyone is wearing masks, the rooms are large enough and everyone keeps their distance.

Depends on way too many factors to make such a blanket statement.  How long are they in the room?  How big is the room?  Windows that can/are open?  Air circulation?  Turnover rate?  Mode of teaching?  Lectures? Discussions? Group sing-alongs?

My 3-hr lab with discussions and activities is not the same as a 50-min lecture in the large hall.

Yes, completely agree.

FishProf

In my department and in one other department in our building, we have actual epidemiologists, virologists, immunologists, and other experts with knowledge in the area of epidemic/pandemic spread and control.

Guess how many of them were asked about what we should be doing.

We can't even get basic info about our own building.   What kinds of filters?  What is the circulation rate for the HVAC system?   What is the % of fresh air being brought in?

All we get is "Within OSHA standards".

WHy are they playing it so close to the vest?  I suspect they just want to be in the "Wha?  We followed the minimum guidelines.  No our fault" zone of (perceived) safety.
I'd rather have questions I can't answer, than answers I can't question.

mleok

Quote from: FishProf on September 04, 2020, 07:56:04 AM
In my department and in one other department in our building, we have actual epidemiologists, virologists, immunologists, and other experts with knowledge in the area of epidemic/pandemic spread and control.

Guess how many of them were asked about what we should be doing.

We can't even get basic info about our own building.   What kinds of filters?  What is the circulation rate for the HVAC system?   What is the % of fresh air being brought in?

All we get is "Within OSHA standards".

WHy are they playing it so close to the vest?  I suspect they just want to be in the "Wha?  We followed the minimum guidelines.  No our fault" zone of (perceived) safety.

Unfortunately, most of this seems to be focused on mitigating the legal liability, and if nobody explicitly told them that their measures were inadequate, it's harder to prove willful negligence on their part.

FishProf

That is a clearer statement of my point.  Thanks.

We are, so far, CV19 free at my campus, but I am doubtful it will last.
I'd rather have questions I can't answer, than answers I can't question.

Dimple_Dumpling72

Quote from: spork on September 03, 2020, 07:57:24 AM
I know of at least one university that built its Covid-19 mitigation plan around defining "contact" as "more than 15 minutes within 6 feet of someone who is not masked." This way students (and instructors) who have shared a classroom with someone who tests positive don't have to quarantine.

This is the definition my uni has adopted, too

spork

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: wonderful testing regimen, predictive model based on faulty assumptions:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/10/health/university-illinois-covid.html.

I should note that the UIUC gets points for actually creating a model and using it to make iterative changes in policies and procedures.
It's terrible writing, used to obfuscate the fact that the authors actually have nothing to say.

science.expat

Here in Aus 'close contact' seems to mean 'in the same area* with a Covid positive person for at least an hour'.

'Same area' can be a gym, pub, restaurant, classroom, etc.