This study from University of Arizona Health is interesting. How long people have antibodies after contracting the disease has been a big concern. So far, the answer appears to be at least 5-7 months. They suspect could be as long as 2 years. That is good news for students and faculty who had COVID as they may be protected for quite a while.
“They found SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are present in blood tests at viable levels for at least five to seven months, although they believe immunity lasts much longer.”
“That said, we know that people who were infected with the first SARS coronavirus, which is the most similar virus to SARS-CoV-2, are still seeing immunity 17 years after infection. If SARS-CoV-2 is anything like the first one, we expect antibodies to last at least two years, and it would be unlikely for anything much shorter.”
“While I agree with your point it is not as easy as public vs private. There are a large number of private that IMO were unsuccessful this fall for various reasons.”
[/quote]
I believe that what Circuitrider was referring to was not a comparison between private and public colleges, but was saying you can’t blame the “businesses” (colleges) for developing/creating/purchasing testing capacity to enable them to safely stay in business when they are subject to a rudderless government that is not creating a cohesive national testing plan. I could be wrong, but I don’t think the intent was to pit private vs public universities. In fact, many public universities created their own testing capacity (Purdue, UIUC, etc). This was in response to Msdynamite’s assertion that colleges shouldn’t be testing their healthy students when nursing homes don’t all have sufficient testing capacity. I think it’s a very valid point that these schools needed to develop their own plan to stay functioning.
[quote=“TheVulcan, post:17299, topic:2088334”]
From EmptyNestSoon:
The Vulcan, I see lots of big schools in Boston (not just tiny SLACs) with 100% of students back, testing 2x per week, bigger student bodies than MIT, doing very well. Tufts, Northeastern and BU all have all students back and none have had outbreaks, just a tiny sprinkling of cases. I am so glad those schools are thriving, not just for their own sakes, but to inspire schools like MIT and Harvard and other schools that didn’t bring back all of their students that it can be done, and done well!
Edit…UGH, there I go again, having formatting issues with quotes ;-). Hopefully you can tell what’s me and what’s being quoted??
@123Mom123 FWIW, my Brown student says that everyone she knows is adhering to the health guidelines and off-campus kids are NOT partying. Most classes are on-line, but are very well taught.
Re Covid among college-aged kids…
So this isn’t scientific at all, just conversations I’ve had with people…
Yesterday I happened to get into a discussion at the dog park with 3 Covid hospital nurses about young adults getting Covid. They all said that they’ve had plenty of young adults admitted at their hospitals, and some were really, really sick. They all seemed pretty upset that most people don’t think the young adults could get really sick from it.
I mentioned that to my D, who said she saw a study that said that the young adults that vape or smoke constitute about 85% of the kids who have significant issues with Covid. And she said you’d be pretty surprised how many college kids vape or smoke pot, so she wasn’t surprised at what the Covid nurses said.
Except there are documented cases of individuals being infected twice with 2 distinct strains of Covid, so while you may retain immunity to the strain that initially infected you, it doesn’t prevent you from contracting it again from a separate strain.
Many schools are making at least some portion of in class instruction work. We will see what happens now with the nationwide increasing infection rate.
Thank you, that is an excellent resource with many ways to slice the data.
Overall, out of 1,442 four year institutions listed, about a third are primarily or fully in person, about a third is hybrid, and another third primarily or fully online.
Out of 50 top 25 USNWR institutions (universities+LACs), 60% are primarily or fully online, 26% are hybrid, 12% are primarily in person, and none are fully in person.
Bears out my spring prognosis:
“The speed and certainty with which universities announce their intention to reopen campuses appear to be in inverse proportion to the strength of their brand and financial position.”
You’re defining the term “re-open” rather narrowly to mean amount of teaching which may or may not be in-person. Surely, some part of the equation should consider how many or what proportion of the students are permitted physically on campus?
Exactly. I am less concerned with the method of instruction and more concerned with who is allowed on campus. Duke may be technically online, but if all kids are welcome on campus, I count that as open.
I think most schools have at least some students on campus. Unfortunately, that site doesn’t seem to have specific data on that.
At any rate, the initial impetus of the rhetoric here and in the outside world has been not so much about the benefits of severely limited in-person masks-on arms-length socialization those students are allowed to partake in at the responsible institutions, but about benefits of in-person instruction.
And what we are seeing is that the most academically elite institutions almost universally are having little to none of it this fall.
In fact, @circuitrider, here’s what you wrote in that message I was responding to some four and a half months ago:
“I think what the last few posts tell me is that the wealthier LACs (and no one can argue that Amherst isn’t wealthy), unlike their rich, largely eastern, Ivy equivalents, realize they have a particular product that goes beyond mere certification; that they are good at it; and, that they are chomping at the bit to show what they can do even under the most strenuous of circumstances.”
Clearly, you have not visited the Duke campus this year. I think the students there would seriously disagree with you, Vulcan, but you are of course welcome to interpret the data however you wish
I did visit last year though, for the Duke TIP Grand Recognition Ceremony with our younger (he was one of their seven Bevan scholars).
I am sure many students will take any college-imposed restrictions over spending another semester with their families;)
…Look, as someone who is, likely, about to pay extra for the Spring semester on campus I sure hope that the experience will still be worth it, but I do not think anyone can expect that it will not be, as I put it, “severely limited”, unless they and their school school are being negligent.
…By the way, I just looked up Duke’s status - it looks like their plans are not dissimilar to other similarly situated schools. The only difference is that they were later than some to admit it.
*"With the growing numbers of new COVID-19 cases in both North Carolina and the country, Duke University is adjusting plans for the residential component of its fall semester.
In a message sent to Duke students, faculty and staff Sunday, President Vincent E. Price said the university will limit Duke-provided housing in the fall to first-year students, sophomores and students who require special accommodations because of personal, academic or other reasons."*
In the interest of fostering harmony on CC I will say that this Duke Library video makes it harder to hate Duke, despite that being expected in our parts:)
Yeah, I’ve had enough of HYPSM defining “whatever-we-do” as the-gold-standard. The fact is they couldn’t or wouldn’t invite more than half their students back and may not be able to for the foreseeable future since a vaccine won’t be universally available until 2022.
