Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Yep, and we will not have an economic recovery until people feel comfortable going out without being afraid that they're going to get Covid.

Many already do.

I think Notre Dame is doing the right thing by trying to get numbers on track before resorting to sending students home.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Exactly regarding values, which is why all factors should be considered in reaching decisions: covid illness itself, job loss and economic damage and associated long term physical health issues, mental health including suicide and anger issues from isolation and despair, and more. Too many consider only health singularly from the only virus standpoint.

Mental health is health.

That’s right and why it needs to be included in the equation while decision making.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Yep, and we will not have an economic recovery until people feel comfortable going out without being afraid that they're going to get Covid.

+1
And one piece in that is not allowing covid to spread uncontrollably in congregate settings like colleges and universities--where young people have active lives and are often asymptomatic and thus spread. Not to say they can't 100% open--I agree it's a balance-- but they have to manage it really, really well for it not to have lots of bad repercussions beyond the university.

Personally, I wish all the universities just decided to have 100% virtual for one semester AND the country simultaneously did a short but hard shut-down while we figured out a testing/contract tracing/quarantine system akin to the rest of our economic peers in the world-- That might finally get us closer to normal life. Instead we're just dragging it all out with lots of half-a**ed measures in hopes that a vaccine will save us before the economy, our mental health and civic life completely collapses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Exactly regarding values, which is why all factors should be considered in reaching decisions: covid illness itself, job loss and economic damage and associated long term physical health issues, mental health including suicide and anger issues from isolation and despair, and more. Too many consider only health singularly from the only virus standpoint.

Mental health is health.

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Yep, and we will not have an economic recovery until people feel comfortable going out without being afraid that they're going to get Covid.

Anonymous wrote:You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Exactly regarding values, which is why all factors should be considered in reaching decisions: covid illness itself, job loss and economic damage and associated long term physical health issues, mental health including suicide and anger issues from isolation and despair, and more. Too many consider only health singularly from the only virus standpoint.

Interesting article about Notre Dame duped the Big 10 and convinced the ACC to play football with the promise of playing more ACC teams in the future. This is all about $$$$


"Notre Dame really wanted to play and was willing to enter into an agreement that could lead to something down the road ... at the very least, more games every year against ACC teams," an insider shared. "They're adamance about playing was the ace-in-the-hole a group, led by Clemson, needed to really push for a season and turn the tide in favor of ignoring the Big Ten.

"I mean, if Notre Dame, with their academic reputation and their national brand, was willing to go forward ... it sort of just sealed the ACC's fate."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the Editor from professors...

https://ndsmcobserver.com/2020/08/recalculating-the-risks/?fbclid=IwAR3VdgJBRXGuWRsTF4uPsbGfBLee0D0Fc7FtmewzQcIepsJ6012594cZKAs

The virus is super scary. So worried for my kid at a different college. But, reading this article brings perspective. And, that is why, I sent mine back. However, every family must weigh this decision for themselves. I like the fact that many schools offer a choice - no one size fits all approach. Good luck to all parents out there.

If your kid is healthy with no underlying conditions, he/she will probably be sick for 4 or 5 days. I am on the ND parents facebook page, and I have only read about kids with very mild symptoms. They are living in apartments and hotel rooms and getting groceries and takeout delivered while taking their virtual classes. There were some problems with catering to the kids at first because of a large spike and some glitches, but it is all going pretty smoothly right now. I hope my son doesn't get sick, but I am not super worried about it.

If you go to the Notre Dame Reddit group you can read about a few kids who are having a tougher time, including at least one taken to the ER (via an Uber, as the school couldn't arrange an ambulance).

You are right. People in public health do tend to put the public's health before other factors: such as the economy.

I think that if you have to prioritize (vs "balance"), they have the equation right. Again, it is about values.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the Editor from professors...

https://ndsmcobserver.com/2020/08/recalculating-the-risks/?fbclid=IwAR3VdgJBRXGuWRsTF4uPsbGfBLee0D0Fc7FtmewzQcIepsJ6012594cZKAs

From FIVE professors, none of which teach science or public health.

and the FIVE have tenure. Hardly a sampling of what all faculty think.

Um, the fact that they have tenure is the reason they feel comfortable speaking out. I would bet there are a ton of non-tenured professors who feel the way they do. I'm sure there are also plenty who don't, but being tenured or non-tenured is probably not what influences how the faculty are feeling. It only affects their willingness to voice it.

Don't think politics does not impact their thinking.

Economics and political science faculty from a Southern School might well vote to open at this time.

Some of this has to do with values and priorities. I am waiting to see the letter from the scientists.

Did you all see the blog from UNC's Dean of Public Health a week or so ago? She reached a very different conclusion.

It's hard to take health expert recommendations without a grain of salt - I mean what do they have to lose by recommending the most conservative and safest path without the responsibility of having to balance economic impact and other factors? I also think they have not put enough emphasis on mental health aspects. There have been some references and articles but not near enough IMO.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, I have a young family member who has been sick for 13 days now. Very sick. She has not been admitted to the hospital but her doctor did send her to the ER for x-rays. She has had a fever and chills that whole time, with chest pain, headache, cough, sore throat, intermittent nausea, fatigue and weakness.

I would NOT want her alone in a room for all of this time. As it is (she is with her husband) I am worried and my heart goes out to her.

She is "young" but she has a husband?

No wonder you are worried.

I guess you are ignorant to the fact that the average age of the college student in the United States is 26.

Get out of your bubble.

Anonymous wrote:Well, I have a young family member who has been sick for 13 days now. Very sick. She has not been admitted to the hospital but her doctor did send her to the ER for x-rays. She has had a fever and chills that whole time, with chest pain, headache, cough, sore throat, intermittent nausea, fatigue and weakness.

I would NOT want her alone in a room for all of this time. As it is (she is with her husband) I am worried and my heart goes out to her.

She is "young" but she has a husband?

No wonder you are worried.

Well, I have a young family member who has been sick for 13 days now. Very sick. She has not been admitted to the hospital but her doctor did send her to the ER for x-rays. She has had a fever and chills that whole time, with chest pain, headache, cough, sore throat, intermittent nausea, fatigue and weakness.

I would NOT want her alone in a room for all of this time. As it is (she is with her husband) I am worried and my heart goes out to her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Letter to the Editor from professors...

https://ndsmcobserver.com/2020/08/recalculating-the-risks/?fbclid=IwAR3VdgJBRXGuWRsTF4uPsbGfBLee0D0Fc7FtmewzQcIepsJ6012594cZKAs

From FIVE professors, none of which teach science or public health.

and the FIVE have tenure. Hardly a sampling of what all faculty think.

Um, the fact that they have tenure is the reason they feel comfortable speaking out. I would bet there are a ton of non-tenured professors who feel the way they do. I'm sure there are also plenty who don't, but being tenured or non-tenured is probably not what influences how the faculty are feeling. It only affects their willingness to voice it.

Don't think politics does not impact their thinking.

Economics and political science faculty from a Southern School might well vote to open at this time.

Some of this has to do with values and priorities. I am waiting to see the letter from the scientists.

Did you all see the blog from UNC's Dean of Public Health a week or so ago? She reached a very different conclusion.