Bama said similar (fully expects to have on-campus instruction this fall).
“We”re planning on it, but we don’t know how we are going to do it safely.” $tellar thought process by those that don’t have to be in classrooms at all and can easily avoid people.
Most students don't need to worry about Covid-19. Most of them might not even know they have it if they get it. Those with diabetes (not many college-aged) must be extra cautious but otherwise Covid-19 is a killer of the elderly, esp. if they have co-morbidities. In retrospect we should've been guarding the gates to nursing homes and elderly like crazy and letting everyone else (except diabetics mostly) live more-or-less normally, albeit with social distance. Of course we didn't know all that then so it's understandable that there was draconian overreaction. However, it's now time to start transitioning back to normal life before it's too late to prevent economic catastrophe (which, again, includes more health catastrophe).
Yes, the economy has been wrecked by the COVID-19 response in the U.S.
Yes, it will get wrecked some more (with accompanying health problems) if society isn't opened up.
*** I haven't seen anyone argue otherwise on MGoBlog. Plenty of straw men along those lines have been constructed. ***
You're suggesting a binary sort on the population going forward. What about people in their 40s who are a little heavy with maybe early heart disease? A healthy 57-year-old with undiagnosed hypertension? Neither is in the same category as an 80-year-old with multiple problems, but both are at a higher risk level than a healthy 10-year-old. It's not a 0/1 matter.
Compromises will be necessary for an "opening up." It appears that we'll be starting with people who work in the meat processing factories.
Covid's impact by age is pretty dramatic. Someone in their 40s who is a little heavy doesn't have much to worry about. Add heart disease and the risk rises of course but is probably still manageable if their heart disease itself is manageable. But no HCQ for that person, just Remdesivir (for now). Unless the person has liver issues then Remdesivir isn't the right choice either. But back to the age disparity of impact. From what i'm reading, high-blood pressure isn't nearly as much of a risk factor as diabetes is (except, again, no HCQ for him/her as the VA study showed).
Take Kalamazoo County for example where I live. Out of all deaths, half of all who died were over 84 and the overall median age was 75. It's a killer of the elderly and that's pretty awful but not nearly as awful as it might've been if it killed without regard to age or health. Have there been a few (percentage-wise) examples of younger people dying from Covid? Tragically, yes, but it's striking how few those cases number, and usually there is obesity or some other co-morbidity at work.
Since the median is by definition half above and half below, how can half of deaths be over 84 yet the median age be 75? That seems self-contradictory to me.
Sorry about that, you are correct; I was 'winging it' from what I had seen the other day. This link here is more precise and authoritative:
https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98163_98173---,00.html
For ALL of Michigan, the average age of all deceased from Covid-19 is 74.8 years old.
Median Age of all dead: 76 years old.
Less than 1% of all deaths in Michigan from Covid were newborns to age 30.
1% of all dead in MIchigan were age 30 to 39.
4% were 40 to 49.
8% were 50 to 59.
19% were 60 to 69.
27% were 70 to 79.
And a full 40% were 80 or older.
There's a definite pattern in there somewhere.
Yes there is. It might just be that they all got infected with COVID-19 because it's a very highly-communicative disease that, until there's a vaccine developed, can best be controlled by social distancing.
Or, "social distancing" exerts a huge toll on society and merely delays the inevitable. What if there isn't a vaccine? Nobody ever interacts with anyone ever again?
This isn't sustainable, and a plan that relies upon a vaccine that doesn't exist isn't a plan; it's a wish.
The death rate below the 70s is still so low it's not worth talking about. I'm 51 and overweight would be my risk category. I'm not worried if I get it at all, the chance of death is still below 0.5%. I intend to keep being reasonable about social distancing and hand washing to lower my risk, and that's about it.
It is pretty damn binary. I don't know how you lock the old people away behind closed doors and keep them there for about 6 months, but that is what should have been done from the get go. It's been known since China who is the highest risk. If you didn't trust their data, Italy was over 80 average age early on. Something like 40% of the deaths in the US are in nursing homes! That's not even accounting for all the elderly live outside of them.
Your guess is as good as mine as to why governments and the media seem to have been ignoring it and acting like it's just as dangerous to a teenager as to an 90 year old.
Your guess is as good as mine as to why governments and the media seem to have been ignoring it and acting like it's just as dangerous to a teenager as to an 90 year old.
Well, just as it is "unacceptable" to refer to COVID as the Wuhan Virus or the Chinese Virus, media is afraid of a very small but highly vocal twitter mob. Single out older people? That's ageism. It's discrimination. Everyone must suffer equally. #inthistogether.
Well, actually it is discrimination. But in the old fashioned meaning of the word where to discriminate was a sign of intelligence. But that kind of discrimination is dead. Too bad because we could use a little old fashioned discrimination, as those who have posted before me have suggested.
There’s more to it than mortality. A lot of “recovered” patients end up with damage to their lungs, heart or other organs. And this is happening to a lot of younger people. They don’t die much from this but suffer the other complications.
Define "a lot". It's easy to find a few people with complications post-disease given the number of people who have had it now. It's also unknown how long these problems may persist, or if these were pre-existing but are simply exacerbated by Covid. Or, honestly, if these were caused by some dingbat trying some at-home remedy distributed by the media or social media.
I'd say given how late in the game these problems were identified, it's a relatively minor issue compared to mortality itself.
two family members have had it, one 22, the other 30. the 22 yr old basically had the flu, no more no less, got tested because his dad is high risk. the 30 yr old got tested for the same reason, was positive for the anti-body, never knew she'd come in contact with it.
anecdotal, but representative of probably millions of young people. they need to get back to their lives. people at risk or concerned need to quarantine. your/their body, your/their choice.
and one more distant and very elderly family member had it and passed.
We can play the anecdote game all day long. I know two people in their 40’s who were knocked out by Covid for a month and are still feeling the effects. Neither your anecdotes nor mine are what we should be basing public policy on,
April 30th, 2020 at 10:11 PM ^
as it relates to young people, actually, i think my anecdotes have been born out millions of times. this is something to be grateful for.
i am glad your friends recovered, tough as it may have been.
‘Sweden has attracted global attention for not imposing a full lockdown, as seen in most of Europe, to contain the coronavirus pandemic.
Nonetheless, data released from the country’s central bank and a leading Swedish think tank show that the economy will be just as badly hit as its European neighbors, if not worse.”
That's not the point you know. The point is, if there should be a second wave they may be unaffected by it, or at least not much affected by it, while the rest of the world goes back into lockdown. (No one knows for sure of course, but it fits general theory.)
Or should this continue for months and months for everyone else, they will done and over the whole thing and their economy will recover faster than everyone else's.
My point was, the virus itself exerts a huge toll on the economy, it isn’t just the stay at home orders. As I’ve pointed out before, car companies closed factories before stay at home orders, meat packing plants had to be ordered to be opened because they shutdown.
Those that pretend their would not be a significant economic impact are even without stay at home orders are living in a fantasy world.
Of course we live in a global economy, and Sweden can't isolate themselves from that, but anyone suggesting that shelter in place doesn't worsen the local economy is being disingenuous.
If hospitals had been over run like they were in Albany Georgia in broader swaths of the country, I’m pretty sure there would have been a pretty big impact. Meat packing plants are a pretty good example of what could have happened on a much wider scale.
If you believe stay at home orders were not particularly effective, it makes sense to say that shelter in place is significantly worse. If you think it was in fact quite effective, I don’t think it is disingenuous at all.
Who is teaching, feeding, etc. these college-aged kids (who are not all college-aged kids)? College isn't Burning Man with books.
Here are the cdc statistics from China prior to March.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6912e2.htm#T1_down
Here are the statistics looking at health care workers in the US from March to April
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e6.htm?s_cid=mm6915e6_x#
The chart at the bottom of the page shows a similar mortality rate however the hospitalization rate dropped significantly, probably the reason why we didn't use all those field hospitals.
April 30th, 2020 at 10:08 PM ^
I suggest you talk to health care workers if you truly believe this. This kind of thinking is what would end up killing millions if we didn’t social distance.
Classic redneck logic.
No they won’t be playing - at least not with fans. Some Countries opening back up Now shutting down with spikes in cases. The U.S. has been the worst. You think Governors are going to let their hospitals get overrun because of football? I’d say ... ah ... no.
I am only half joking when I say... You obviously havent spent much time in Alabama.
And I say that because I spent a few years there and lets just say the folks there may seek impeachment if theres a remote chance football can be played but the governor disallowed it.
Right but expect means absolutely nothing. If there’s a second wave of covid and it’s not safe for students to be back on campus, I expect Texas A&M and UT will join the rest of the country in foregoing football in the fall
If there is a notable 2nd wave of Covid, it probably would not arrive until November at the earliest. By then there will many more tools (antiviral drugs, antibody therapies, and just possibly an emergency use vaccine) to deal with it effectively. I think colleges are now in the clear to resume normal activity for the fall, albeit probably limiting large crowds.
If there is a notable 2nd wave of Covid, it probably would not arrive until November at the earliest.
I realize COVID-19 isn't the same thing as the 1918 Spanish Flu, but the second wave began in the U.S. by August 1918, and October 1918 was the month with the highest fatality rate of the whole pandemic.
Nobody knows yet how this one is going to progress.
That's exactly right. We can expect a second wave, but timing and severity are the variables. Hopefully by Oct./Nov. we will have testing more widely available and (with a stroke of luck) a vaccine. Will there already be partial immunity? Will a vaccine be a factor? Will we be able to test and track?
Having a vaccine in October wouldn't be a stroke of luck. It would be absolutely terrifying, because there are only two realistic possibilities:
- The vaccine is effectively untested
- The virus actually was engineered, and thus the vaccine was already in development
Since there is absolutely no evidence to support #2, my guess would be #1. I am very much pro-vaccine; I am up to date on my immunizations -- the anti-vax "studies" are pseudoscience. However, that's because I know that the vaccines currently in use have been tested against a broad population and shown to have acceptable levels of risk and effectiveness. If there's a vaccine in October, for a disease that wasn't isolated until late 2019, I'd be last in line to try it.
Under operation warp speed, the federal government is aiming for January
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/29/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-vaccine-operation-warp-speed.html?referringSource=articleShare
“According to one official, the idea would be to indemnify the major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies from liability if the vaccines cause sickness or death”
“According to one official, the idea would be to indemnify the major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies from liability if the vaccines cause sickness or death”
That, right there, should terrify anyone. I am happy to use a vaccine that has been tested as rigorously as others that are on the market. I want no part of a vaccine that has been fast-tracked to the point where they had to indemnify pharmaceutical companies against damages from killing me.
All vaccines -- indeed, all medicines -- carry some risk. That's the kernel of truth that feeds the pseudoscience of anti-vax. The reason that you do trials isn't just to make sure that a drug works; it's also to make sure that the side effects aren't such that the cure is worse than the disease.
I pulled the quote just for you, but I wholeheartedly agree. A vaccine that many people are unwilling to use is not particularly helpful. If manufacturers can’t stand behind it, I can’t imagine many people wanting to take it.
Any vaccine prior to next June would involve skipping established protocols.
As a result, it will kill a percentage of recipients.
At some point, the reality of 18 months of isolation versus opening up to all but the elderly and most susceptible will prevail.
The loneliness from lack of contact in our older population will become a health issue in itself.
The chances of a vaccine fast-tracked are slim. The reality of vaccine manufacturing/ production capabilities are extremely limited in quantity.
It is not as if something was available this Fall, it would be available to everyone. It doesn't work that way.
When and IF, a vaccine is approved it will available in quantity to treat say 70+ year olds, then certain health factors as next in line.
This isn't about right or wrong, or political leanings. At the end of the day it is about the the viral exposures that human kind has suffered from, and gained immunity from, for millenniums.
I’m not sure where this straw of stay at home for 18 months has come from. I’m pretty sure just about every state is working to open up. Will they all be next week, definitely not. Will most, if not all of them be by sometime in June, I’d bet yes. Will most of them still have some restrictions, once again, I’d bet yes.
Fair enough if that's correct about the Spanish Flu of 1918; I didn't know that. It's certainly not "flu season" so it does surprise me. By the way, my great, great grandmother died from that flu epidemic. She was just 29 or 30 years old and her death had pretty a pretty awful impact on my grandmother who had a very hard life b/c of it.
The so-called Spanish flu was so devastating. It killed children, perfectly healthy people in the prime of their lives, anyone, everyone. Thank God that Covid-19 didn't turn out to be even 1/20 as virulent since it could've been so much worse with how transmissible it is. The CDC initially commanding that no one wear face masks (not just N95 masks which was an understandable concern with the shortages) was a big mistake.
And there it is. The stamp of obvious. So, the CDC is to blame for not recommending masks. And your level of empathy is rooted in your own perceived victimization. I hope your family recovered from the loss. Ah, yes. Do you moonlight as a twitter fiend between 12am and 3 am?
Not sure where your weird hostility is coming from. My level of empathy has nothing to do with this. The Spanish Flu killed millions of people regardless of age or health. So yes that was more tragic by and large by than Covid-19. Isn't that obvious to everyone? It should be.
I guess they can play each other every weekend
You need to play other schools so feels like wishful thinking or posturing to me.
Hope it’s back in 2020 but anybody confidently talking about specific timing right now is bullshitting.
Well, it's not really up to them is it?
I mean, I'm hopefull that a second wave doesnt occur in the fall, but I don't see why it wouldn't based on how other airborn diseases behave on a yearly basis. Testing may ramp up by then, but in any case, it will be up to the Gov's of each state to decide on the conditions of opening up.
These draconian shutdowns cannot continue much longer or there will be economic hell to pay (which includes its own health mortality death tolls too). In fact there already is, we're just not seeing/feeling the full impact yet.
I have no clue what to make of this. The President of Texas Tech talks about reducing density of student groups and applying that towards athletics. Does this mean playing without fans or reduced crowds? The A&M chancellor says he "wants to make this happen". And according to the article UT has not announced plans but will do so in June.
UNC school systems and Alabama have indicated they expect to be open in the fall. Again none of them have laid out an clear plan, just a strong desire and expectation that they will be open for in person classes in the fall.
I live in Florida and the schools in the deep SE are pushing to keep schools open even now. My wife is a teacher and the county just extended the school year one week for “weather make up days”. What a joke.
She teaches 2nd grade and keeps in contact with her kids via telephone, because allegedly most of the parents sold the IBM ThinkPads the district gave them at the beginning of the schools being closed. At least she is still getting her base pay.
I guess my point is to agree that schools down here will be pressured to open in the fall.
They sold the tablets?! Holy hell.
Count me as a doubter.... but it's there is still time for the situation to improve
Yes, the situation has already improved dramatically and will continue doing so going forward. The Covid tsunami is over now and just like with actual tsunamis what we're seeing now is the tide receding back into the ocean. It was devastating and shocking, yes, esp. for the elderly, those in ill-health already, and those in densely packed cities like Detroit, NYC, etc, but it's all but over now. Cases continue to fall dramatically and effective treatments are advancing rapidly (just yesterday, confirmation in a large 3rd phase study that Remdesivir shortens the duration of viral infection which is great news). A safe & effective vaccine will be the ultimate Covid-Killer but even before that we should be okay now. Yes there could be a flare-up in the fall, but nothing like what we saw this spring with the novel virus we knew nothing about and didn't know how to defend against.
I think the southern schools are correct to anticipate life returning to normal on campuses this fall. Maybe not football stadiums packed with fans like sardines, nor mosh pits, nor other super close contact, but mostly normal life again.
Cases continue to fall dramatically
This is not true. After declining from a high on April 24, new cases have risen for three straight days and yesterday's total of 28,429 was higher than the total for April 12.
On top of that, the daily death totals for 4-28 and 4-29—2,470 and 2,390, respectively—are the fifth and sixth highest US totals.