California state university system cancels fall classes on campus

[HobokenHusky]

Here are some of the terms people have used:

"completely defies all logic"

"insane"

"idiocy"

"goes to the extreme with everything"

Here's an explanation that suggests that this wasn't just a made up thing to provoke reactions, be crazy, or such. People's emotions can often erupt into their expressing themselves with exaggerated words. I don't think such words are accurate or helpful.

I don't know whether the Cal State closures are a good idea or a bad idea. I'm not surprised that there are conflicting reports, changes from prior decisions, and confusion.

That's all fine and good about the reasoning for making the decision this early, but it doesn't address the fact that there is no reasonable logic for even making the decision at all.

It's like defending a parent for the thoughtful way they went about telling their child they were not allowed to play sports, and ignoring the fact that the parent decided the kid couldn't play sports for "safety reasons" bc they stubbed their big toe during warm ups at the first practice.

 

[upstater]

obviously because they don't value freedom

They protest and complain about not being able to go out after a decade of watching Foxnews in a lazyboy 23 hours a day.

 

[ctchamps]

Exactly. This is nuts. To make a determination now, in the middle of May, is insane. California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, and New York are going to see mass protests real soon.

When you're out there protesting hold up a JimHurley sign so we can identify you.

 

[HuskyBandDad]

Did anyone listen to the head of the system talk about it or is everyone just relying on headlines and being shocked? He said he is doing this to allow the most of time for preparation and decision making. It is not easy to shift an entire system (well almost entire because they will still allow in person learning is some certain cases) to distance learning. Doing this now allows for the professors to prepare to enable the best possible learning situation. Most already know how to teach in person and are on cruise control in the classroom. It is more difficult to switch from in person to distance learning than the other way around. This allows professors time to adjust and prepare and make the best possible learning situation. Also, allows the students to make a decision about their future. Rather than enrolling, paying, and then being blindsided with distance learning at the last minute, they can decide yes or no, and then not have to worry about residential arrangements, etc that may fall through at the last minute. They know what they are signing up for. He made good arguments for making the decision now and living with it. Now for my additional take, I would think that that the Cal State program has a significant Asian population that will not allowed back into the country in August. This is a way for Cal State to receive payment and keep those students enrolled and able to “take classes” and more importantly pay. I may be wrong on that point as it’s my guess, but it’s a los easier to reach California from Asia than the east coast so it seems logical.

I'm not just picking on you (I'm also picking on @JimHurley, for example) , but, with all due respect, no one on this board has any idea what plates the decision makers in California are spinning. It may or may not be the case that they are jumping the gun and being overly cautious in canceling fall on-campus classes, but to definitively state that the decision is premature, or crazy, or anything else is completely baseless. (Unless you are actually involved in the decision in California. In that case I take it all back.)

p
Hey just a crazy idea. How about planning for both situations.
Fall classes don’t start for 3 months.
They shutdown and went online pretty quickly.
So why the rush to shut it all down now?

 

[ctchamps]

If they are upfront as to what their criteria is to reopen the economy and show progress in doing that, NY state has already said that portions of the state will be able to slowly reopen this weekend. If people want to be dumb and crowd beaches with no regard for each other then having to reclose down is the result.

There are multiple ways of looking at the same thing. Those people aren't dumb. They are brave. We should encourage more of them to congregate and have rallies and do so without masks. All these individuals will increase herd immunity.

People who think this is wrong should mass communicate to authorities to lock them up, lock them up. Outside of a vaccination or medicinal solution to minimize viral impacts this is the best solution. This will be retro to the sixties with the polar opposite political spectrum getting arrested.

 

[Get a Job]

Only because someone picked it up outside first. Once that happens they will transmit it at home regardless of whether there is a stay at home order or not. However, without stay at home they will also transmit it at work, restaurants and many other places.

Well said. People who parrot the statistic about most cases being found in people who are isolating seem to be indicating they are the smartest guys in the room, but really they are revealing how little they think about what they read. If most people are isolating, than of course many of the people who test positive will be people who were isolating. Now, if it is found that the infection rate is higher in homebound people vs. people who go out into public, that is a different story.

 

[JimHurley]

When you're out there protesting hold up a JimHurley sign so we can identify you.

No, my friend. The majority of those protesting are the ones who are not able to afford rent, put food on the table, or provide for their families. Those of us fortunate enough to still be working or to work from home (myself luckily) should be more open minded. A lot of people who still have jobs would feel differently if they were unable to provide for themselves or their families because their states want to stayed locked down until a vaccine comes along, all for a virus that effects mostly the elderly. We can still PROTECT the elderly and vulnerable while slowly getting people back to work. It's not a one variable issue.

 

[ctchamps]

Over constantly moving the goal posts on the length of stay at home orders.

You, @superjohn, @NJHusky and a couple of others are moving the goal posts by only talking about deaths and not discussing the intent of social isolation. The primary purpose is to flatten the curve of the disease and not overwhelm the medical system.

We are approaching the minimum requirements of PPE and ventilators but not there yet. We are even further behind with enough testing to do contact tracing.

You all seem to conveniently forget that a good number of people over 35 required hospitalization and intensive care. Certainly the majority of those people under 70 without pre existing conditions survived compared to that other group who are at a higher risk of dying. But that doesn't alleviate overwhelming our medical system.

We should all be upset with the vastly inadequate response to the outbreak. Not having enough tests is the problem and the only reason we are debating economics over medical.

 

[upstater]

Not having enough tests is the problem and the only reason we are debating economics over medical.

Precisely. Or heck, we could have dealt with the economics aspect much better by taking Fed. Gov. Bullards' advice to fund all private salaries for a period. That would have ended the economic devastation. There are solutions and answers. We are just incapable of applying them.

 

[JimHurley]

You, @superjohn, @NJHusky and a couple of others are moving the goal posts by only talking about deaths and not discussing the intent of social isolation. The primary purpose is to flatten the curve of the disease and not overwhelm the medical system.

We are approaching the minimum requirements of PPE and ventilators but not there yet. We are even further behind with enough testing to do contact tracing.

You all seem to conveniently forget that a good number of people over 35 required hospitalization and intensive care. Certainly the majority of those people under 70 without pre existing conditions survived compared to that other group who are at a higher risk of dying. But that doesn't alleviate overwhelming our medical system.

We should all be upset with the vastly inadequate response to the outbreak. Not having enough tests is problem and the only reason we are debating economics over medical.

The curve has been flattened. The medical system is as far from overwhelmed as it gets. Hospitals are going bankrupt, nurses are getting laid off. This is because other procedures are being put off and people are scared to go to the doctor. I work in healthcare economics and I can tell you hospitals are reporting that there are FAR more available hospital beds than reported cases of the virus.

Not having enough tests is a problem, but testing is also overrated. Are we supposed to test every human every time they leave their house? Think about the number of tests we'd need to be considered sufficient. I guarantee that number of tests is not even a possibility. It is literally not possible to test everyone on a regular basis. We have 330,000,000 people in the country. Even if 1 in 4 people leave their house, are we going to conduct 75,000,000 tests daily? Not even remotely possible.

 

[ctchamps]

No, my friend. The majority of those protesting are the ones who are not able to afford rent, put food on the table, or provide for their families. Those of us fortunate enough to still be working or to work from home (myself luckily) should be more open minded. A lot of people who still have jobs would feel differently if they were unable to provide for themselves or their families because their states want to stayed locked down until a vaccine comes along, all for a virus that effects mostly the elderly. We can still PROTECT the elderly and vulnerable while slowly getting people back to work. It's not a one variable issue.

I understand desperation and I'm in complete sympathy with those who are facing financial ruin. Explain to me why many of those protestors are not wearing masks even trying to socially distance? Because by appearances at the very least it appears to be more of a political statement than an economic statement.

 

[JimHurley]

I understand desperation and I'm in complete sympathy with those who are facing financial ruin. Explain to me why many of those protestors are not wearing masks even trying to socially distance? Because by appearances at the very least it appears to be more of a political statement than an economic statement.

It is probably both. Why protestors don't wear masks I don't know. They should. But think twice before determining that every protestor is making a political stand. A lot of these peoples' lives depend on getting back to work.

 

[ctchamps]

The curve has been flattened. The medical system is as far from overwhelmed as it gets. Hospitals are going bankrupt, nurses are getting laid off. This is because other procedures are being put off and people are scared to go to the doctor. I work in healthcare economics and I can tell you hospitals are reporting that there are FAR more available hospital beds than reported cases of the virus.

Not having enough tests is a problem, but testing is also overrated. Are we supposed to test every human every time they leave their house? Think about the number of tests we'd need to be considered sufficient. I guarantee that number of tests is not even a possibility.

You're hatching the chickens while the eggs are not yet laid. If there virus is zero, or there is herd immunity or a there is a vaccination or adequate medical treatment to the illness, then you don't need testing and contact tracing (the better option which countries like S. Korea and Germany are doing) or social isolation (the far worse option that poorly organized countries like USA must resort to).

The part of me that wants to see the economy moving along is in harmony with you and those facing economic hardships. The part of me in sympathy with our medical workers and those individuals getting severely sick and dying is in harmony with those advocating for a slower move to opening the economy.

NONE OF US should be in this situation to have to make such a drastic choice between two very important needs.

 

[superjohn]

You, @superjohn, @NJHusky and a couple of others are moving the goal posts by only talking about deaths and not discussing the intent of social isolation. The primary purpose is to flatten the curve of the disease and not overwhelm the medical system.

We are approaching the minimum requirements of PPE and ventilators but not there yet. We are even further behind with enough testing to do contact tracing.

You all seem to conveniently forget that a good number of people over 35 required hospitalization and intensive care. Certainly the majority of those people under 70 without pre existing conditions survived compared to that other group who are at a higher risk of dying. But that doesn't alleviate overwhelming our medical system.

We should all be upset with the vastly inadequate response to the outbreak. Not having enough tests is problem and the only reason we are debating economics over medical.

We've done that, it's why goalposts are being moved as I keep pointing out. Prtizker spent $80 million plus turning McCormick into a Covid hospital and vacant hospitals into Covid hospitals. They haven't seen a single covid patient and are being dismantled. A couple hospitals out here are pleading people to come into their half empty hospitals.

 

[ctchamps]

It is probably both. Why protestors don't wear masks I don't know. They should. But think twice before determining that every protestor is making a political stand. A lot of these peoples' lives depend on getting back to work.

I'm well aware that both are attending these rallies. I'm not throwing everyone under the bus. Not my style.

 

[JimHurley]

You're hatching the chickens while the eggs are not yet laid. If there virus is zero, or there is herd immunity or a there is a vaccination or adequate medical treatment to the illness, then you don't need testing and contact tracing (the better option which countries like S. Korea and Germany are doing) or social isolation (the far worse option that poorly organized countries like USA must resort to).

The part of me that wants to see the economy moving along is in harmony with you and those facing economic hardships. The part of me in sympathy with our medical workers and those individuals getting severely sick and dying is in harmony with those advocating for a slower move to opening the economy.

NONE OF US should be in this situation to have to make such a drastic choice between two very important needs.

Very fair. I'd argue the virus will never get to zero, there may never be herd immunity, and a vaccination might not even be effective. If that's the case, we just gonna stay locked down forever? I know the flu comparison is not a good one but we have a vaccine for that, it spikes every year, and people die every year. That's sadly the way life is sometimes. That doesn't mean the whole country needs to be on house arrest. The chances of a healthy individual under 55 dying from this virus is astonishingly low. It will happen, yes, but extremely unlikely. For those who aren't vulnerable, it's time to use some common sense and begin a slow return to normalcy.

 

[UCfor3]

It is probably both. Why protestors don't wear masks I don't know. They should. But think twice before determining that every protestor is making a political stand. A lot of these peoples' lives depend on getting back to work.

A lot of these peoples lives also depend on being protected from the virus as well. If many of them are not wearing masks during the protests, can we really expect these same people to act responsibly to protect themselves and more importantly other people when they are allowed to return to work? I have sympathy for them but they need to be smarter, respect the virus and other people around them. Being part of the problem is going to make it harder for them to get what they want.

 

[ctchamps]

We've done that, it's why goalposts are being moved as I keep pointing out. Prtizker spent $80 million plus turning McCormick into a Covid hospital and vacant hospitals into Covid hospitals. They haven't seen a single covid patient and are being dismantled. A couple hospitals out here are pleading people to come into their half empty hospitals.

Yes I know. Social isolation worked. Let's reexamine history. What do you think was the original number of infected individuals that were roaming around the USA prior to the people in this country volunteering or being mandated to socially isolating? Would that number be larger than currently exists?

Certainly we have some herd immunity which is something that didn't exist back in February or March. Is that herd immunity sufficient to avoid an even larger outbreak then the original? And if not, what will the reaction of the majority of Americans be to a second or third larger outbreak if they overwhelm hospitals in many areas of the country like NYC?

 

[navery12]

The one thing I don't understand is how many people are just willing to accept that people will have to make a choice between working to afford rent and putting themselves at risk of sickness/death. Obviously we're not going to shut down and stay socially isolated forever and anyone claiming that is being disingenuous. But that we're 2 months in and already at the point of having to open up too early is a bad sign

 

[NJHusky]

You, @superjohn, @NJHusky and a couple of others are moving the goal posts by only talking about deaths and not discussing the intent of social isolation. The primary purpose is to flatten the curve of the disease and not overwhelm the medical system.

We are approaching the minimum requirements of PPE and ventilators but not there yet. We are even further behind with enough testing to do contact tracing.

EXACTLY....but it's not me that's moving the goalpost. It's you. Seems like the new goal is zero covid before reopen. That's not realistic unless you want a total shutdown for another year.

The goal was to flatten the curve...and it has been flattened. NYC sent the hospital ship away and the Javits center hospital is closing because it's not needed. Didn't NYC ship out ventilators because they weren't needed? Aren't we now sending ventilators to other countries because we don't need them?

My nephew is an oncologist in NJ and he had to help out in the hospital for a few weeks...when they were 95% Covid cases. He's now back to his regular practice because there are more NON-Covid patients in the hospital than covid, and they have excess ICU capacity.

 

[JimHurley]

A lot of these peoples lives also depend on being protected from the virus as well. If many of them are not wearing masks during the protests, can we really expect these same people to act responsibly to protect themselves and more imortantly other people when they are allowed to return to work? I have sympathy for them but they need to be smarter, respect the virus and other people around them. Being part of the problem is going to make it harder for them to get what they want.

I'm assuming that those protesting are NOT those who are vulnerable to dying from the virus. If you're over the age of 55 and/or have medical issues, and you're out protesting without a mask, well I don't what to say to those people. But the reality is those who are under 55 without medical issues are extremely, extremely unlikely to die of this. A large number won't even be symptomatic. That's no excuse to go out acting like a reckless fool, but for the vast majority of the population the risk of death is very low. It's those people who are becoming the most restless.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

That's all fine and good about the reasoning for making the decision this early, but it doesn't address the fact that there is no reasonable logic for even making the decision at all.

It's like defending a parent for the thoughtful way they went about telling their child they were not allowed to play sports, and ignoring the fact that the parent decided the kid couldn't play sports for "safety reasons" bc they stubbed their big toe during warm ups at the first practice.

"no reasonable logic"

"stubbed their big toe during warm ups at the first practice"

Both strike me as more extreme and exaggerated phrasing, either for heightened effect, or because you can't or won't stack things up side-by-side in a calm fashion for reasonable analysis. Doing the latter would be more helpful toward building agreement among people who do not initially see things the same way.

Again, I can't tell if you are right or wrong, much as I might like to, but I can make a pretty reasonable guess about how you feel, even without you languaging things in terms of emotions.

 

[NJHusky]

then you don't need testing and contact tracing (the better option which countries like S. Korea and Germany are doing) or social isolation (the far worse option that poorly organized countries like USA must resort to).

NONE OF US should be in this situation to have to make such a drastic choice between two very important needs.

What are you talking about? I spoke to friends in Germany last month and they were on lockdown...and this is in a small town not Frankfurt!

No one should be born poor or with other issues either....the world was dealt a hand by China and we are dealing with it as best as possible.

 

[superjohn]

Yes I know. Social isolation worked. Let's reexamine history. What do you think was the original number of infected individuals that were roaming around the USA prior to the people in this country volunteering or being mandated to socially isolating? Would that number be larger than currently exists?

Certainly we have some herd immunity which is something that didn't exist back in February or March. Is that herd immunity sufficient to avoid an even larger outbreak then the original? And if not, what will the reaction of the majority of Americans be to a second or third larger outbreak if they overwhelm hospitals in many areas of the country like NYC?

I've said since the beginning I think we've gone about this all wrong. I wanted an approach like Dr. Katz has been advocating. We should have done a real shutdown, like nobody leaving their homes for anything for a few weeks except for the truly essential. From there a staggered reopening with the young population and then we go from there, employing something along the lines of what Sweden has done. Sweden's mistake is the same as ours, they haven't protected people in nursing homes.

I think what we've done pretty much ensures a second or third wave.

 

[JimHurley]

The one thing I don't understand is how many people are just willing to accept that people will have to make a choice between working to afford rent and putting themselves at risk of sickness/death. Obviously we're not going to shut down and stay socially isolated forever and anyone claiming that is being disingenuous. But that we're 2 months in and already at the point of having to open up too early is a bad sign

You're right but the reality is that the vast majority are not at risk of sickness/death. Those who are should not have to choose, correct. The virus has between a 0.4-0.9% death rate, with the average age of death being higher than the average life expectancy. That population should be protected at all costs. But for those under 50, the virus has a less than 0.1% death rate. And that is what is frustrating people. The fact that a virus effecting mainly the elderly, who are already prone to illness, is shutting down the country. Now for me, my grandparents live with me so I am not going anywhere other than the grocery store. I know my actions could take their lives, and I'm taking as much caution as possible to avoid that. But not everyone is in my position...