Is Notre Dame screwing up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

Why do you care? What motivates you to obsess over this school you don't live near, your kids don't attend? It's creepy and unstable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

Why do you care? What motivates you to obsess over this school you don't live near, your kids don't attend? It's creepy and unstable.

NP: Oh, come on. Everyone is watching because we need to know what happens when we throw caution to the wind and open schools. Many schools are doing the watch and wait -- and this is what they are watching.

[Anonymous]

I personally am glad that Notre Dame decided to be the experimental petri dish so the rest of the universities will think twice about their policies and decisions. We now know it was an abominable failure and can only hope the other universities who have made the poor decision to brings students back to campus will rethink that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I personally am glad that Notre Dame decided to be the experimental petri dish so the rest of the universities will think twice about their policies and decisions. We now know it was an abominable failure and can only hope the other universities who have made the poor decision to brings students back to campus will rethink that.

Other schools (Duke, for example) went back roughly around the same time but do not seem to be having similar issues. There is a wide variation in how detailed any individual school’s planning is, reflecting differences in how much time they put into it and how strict the proposed rules are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally am glad that Notre Dame decided to be the experimental petri dish so the rest of the universities will think twice about their policies and decisions. We now know it was an abominable failure and can only hope the other universities who have made the poor decision to brings students back to campus will rethink that.

Other schools (Duke, for example) went back roughly around the same time but do not seem to be having similar issues. There is a wide variation in how detailed any individual school’s planning is, reflecting differences in how much time they put into it and how strict the proposed rules are.

Duke has cases, but they only update their dashboard once a week so you can't see if there's a daily rise. https://coronavirus.duke.edu/covid-testing/

The virus spreads unevenly. All it takes is one super spreader event (which may be what happened at Notre Dame) and it's all over. Considering every other college in NC has problems, I don't see how Duke will avoid them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

You are not looking at the data correctly. As of today there were 16 positive cases of the 2,311 surveillance tests conducted. That is a 0.7% positivity rate.

[Anonymous]

Did you see the posts yesterday about how great ND was doing? Well - they are not doing great. It is silly, and dangerous, to pretend ND is doing great. Incidentally, ND, is NOT pretending it is doing great. Read the campus rules for students living on campus. They are pretty akin to what you would find for a low security prison. With a cost of attendance averaging $73,000 a year that is likely not what students (and parents) were looking for. That’s not ND’s fault. And, ND is not unique. It’s a pandemic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

Why do you care? What motivates you to obsess over this school you don't live near, your kids don't attend? It's creepy and unstable.

I'm interested because my son goes to a similar school but has not started.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

You are not looking at the data correctly. As of today there were 16 positive cases of the 2,311 surveillance tests conducted. That is a 0.7% positivity rate.

You're reading it wrong too, PP. 16 positive surveillance tests out of 1593 surveillance tests conducted. That's a 1% positivity rate. Not a huge difference, but that is the accurate number.

For diagnostic tests the positivity rate is almost 20% (455 out of 2311). Not good... though the % positive will be a much more informative number once there's at least a couple weeks of data. Right now it's being skewed by very high % positive rates from the first couple days of testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

You are not looking at the data correctly. As of today there were 16 positive cases of the 2,311 surveillance tests conducted. That is a 0.7% positivity rate.

You're reading it wrong too, PP. 16 positive surveillance tests out of 1593 surveillance tests conducted. That's a 1% positivity rate. Not a huge difference, but that is the accurate number.

For diagnostic tests the positivity rate is almost 20% (455 out of 2311). Not good... though the % positive will be a much more informative number once there's at least a couple weeks of data. Right now it's being skewed by very high % positive rates from the first couple days of testing.

Got it...I picked the wrong denominator. But 1% is far from 20%, which is what the PP was referencing as the surveillance tests or what the PP termed as random tests. I agree with the that spike from the parties caused some problems, but the curve continues to be flat since then. I admire ND's determination and hope those kids return to the classrooms soon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, according to the ND covid webpage - ND is conducting surveillance testing. Students are,apparently, randomly selected to be tested. The report to the ND testing site (stadium), and get tested. Easy.

The problem is that 20 percent of these 2000 random tests are positive. Those are out of control epidemic numbers.

You are not looking at the data correctly. As of today there were 16 positive cases of the 2,311 surveillance tests conducted. That is a 0.7% positivity rate.

You're reading it wrong too, PP. 16 positive surveillance tests out of 1593 surveillance tests conducted. That's a 1% positivity rate. Not a huge difference, but that is the accurate number.

For diagnostic tests the positivity rate is almost 20% (455 out of 2311). Not good... though the % positive will be a much more informative number once there's at least a couple weeks of data. Right now it's being skewed by very high % positive rates from the first couple days of testing.

Good clarification, thanks. Hope their efforts are successful!

[Anonymous]

ND's dashboard isn't very well built, but you can find what you need. Adding to previous poster, yesterday ND conducted 241 diagnostic tests and 30 were positive, for a rate of 12.4%--trending down from 20%. They conducted 442 surveillance tests and 0 were positive for a rate of 0.0%. 12.4% still seems a bit high but remember these are all sick people with symptoms or people who had been exposed. Similarly, the 0% instant rate for surveillance / 1% total isn't that meaningful either. There aren't good benchmarks; states are reporting a mixture of "sick" and "well" tests. Many / most tests in NY right now, e.g., are people "just checking", returning from travel, etc. TL;DR: I don't think ND is "out of control" or "in control." I think they're dealing with a highly communicable disease pretty well, and we'll see where the numbers trend. Also, it's really unclear how ill these people are. That would be helpful to know.

[Anonymous]

One interesting observation:

Pre-enrollment testing, when they tested the entire student body coming back from all over the country after Summer break resulted in 33 positive cases.

This week, after two weeks of classes, they are showing 30 kids per DAY testing positive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One interesting observation:

Pre-enrollment testing, when they tested the entire student body coming back from all over the country after Summer break resulted in 33 positive cases.

This week, after two weeks of classes, they are showing 30 kids per DAY testing positive.

To be expected. Massively heterogenous population from all over the country mixing together all at once disrupts any behavioral or immunological stability you may have had and you have an outbreak. This is why kids all get sick after going back to school. This is no different. Flu outbreaks happen on colleges after winter break. Where I went, every late January, a third of the kids would be hacking with bronchitis in the big lecture halls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One interesting observation:

Pre-enrollment testing, when they tested the entire student body coming back from all over the country after Summer break resulted in 33 positive cases.

This week, after two weeks of classes, they are showing 30 kids per DAY testing positive.

To be expected. Massively heterogenous population from all over the country mixing together all at once disrupts any behavioral or immunological stability you may have had and you have an outbreak. This is why kids all get sick after going back to school. This is no different. Flu outbreaks happen on colleges after winter break. Where I went, every late January, a third of the kids would be hacking with bronchitis in the big lecture halls.

Except for the fact you would assume the 33 would have been quarantined out of the pool, so the new outbreaks have come from ?____? Must be the local community interacting with students, or perhaps the campus-wide screen wasn't as effective as hoped.