Coronavirus in Massachusetts (Boston, Everett, Chelsea: philosophy, how much, house)

[bohemka]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

Some of it is facilities related as to why some are remote, and some are not. All depends on the sort of air circulation the building has available. Some buildings have modern heating systems with filtration, and others have windowless (or unable to open the windows) rooms with radiant heating and no circulation. This may not play a role in every decision, but in the case of one of my kids, it is the reason they are remote, with a plan to go hybrid once some heating system upgrades are done.

Also, the teachers themselves do not vote. It's the school committee, which are elected officials. The union has it's own things to say, but for most part, your average 2nd or 3rd grade teacher here really doesn't have much of a say and is just along for the ride.

I can state with certainty that our teachers' union is the reason why they are not teaching in the classroom right now. I've heard this from teachers, our select board, and our school committee. The school committee may stamp the order, but they are powerless against the union.

[BostonMike7]

Originally Posted by bohemka

I can state with certainty that our teachers' union is the reason why they are not teaching in the classroom right now. I've heard this from teachers, our select board, and our school committee. The school committee may stamp the order, but they are powerless against the union.

Opposite with the school system my wife teaches in. The committee voted the current system in, and then the union came up with changes it wanted enacted.

[wolfgang239]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

Cautionary note! Our "real" positivity rate may be north of 3%, not <1%, when adjusted for the repeated volume of asymptomatic testing being done by our colleges. This represents a disturbing increase in recent weeks. Seems to me this would not support the recent loosening of indoor dining restrictions. Not good, going into the cold season!

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/...-urge-caution/

Doesn't using this metric mean that eventually there will be nobody left to test? As more people enter the repeat category the new tests will skew positive. Many (most?) people getting regularly tested are doing so for compliance or due to higher exposure risk, whereas new tests at this point are probably people who feel sick.

Does any other state or country use this method? It can show us cases are growing but to draw much of an accurate conclusion from it is difficult in my mind.

[jayrandom]

Originally Posted by htfdcolt

Cautionary note! Our "real" positivity rate may be north of 3%, not <1%, when adjusted for the repeated volume of asymptomatic testing being done by our colleges. This represents a disturbing increase in recent weeks. Seems to me this would not support the recent loosening of indoor dining restrictions. Not good, going into the cold season!

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/...-urge-caution/

Originally Posted by wolfgang239

Doesn't using this metric mean that eventually there will be nobody left to test? As more people enter the repeat category the new tests will skew positive. Many (most?) people getting regularly tested are doing so for compliance or due to higher exposure risk, whereas new tests at this point are probably people who feel sick.

Does any other state or country use this method? It can show us cases are growing but to draw much of an accurate conclusion from it is difficult in my mind.

Yeah. I wouldn't worry too much about COVID positive rates by themselves. Especially by the second metric. Positive test rates indicate how accessible testing is, and does so only indirectly. The raw number actually does a better job in this regard, because it likely reflects testing of asymptomatic people without known COVID contacts, which is the missing component in all this. When my daughter had a sore throat the pediatrician recommended COVID testing, even though we suspected strep (both were negative), so I suspect that most of the symptomatic COVID cases are being identified.

Presumably most of the spread is from asymptomatic people. The best-case-scenario for testing is something that is so cheap and easy it could be done daily or even more frequently. Such a test would drop the first number to very low, indicating great testing, while the second number would simply become an indication of what fraction of the population got COVID for the first time that day. Something that the "daily new case count" already does.

[OutdoorLover]

In discussions of risks with in-classroom learning, risks to students themselves, as well as their family members at home, are often discussed. What's often left out though, are the risks to teachers and other school staff members, who are not kids anymore, and who are probably less than keen on risking serious illness and death themselves. That's a valid concern.

[sawyer2]

The test results to date for local universities still look good

- NEU 84 positive results out of 164K tests
- BU 122/160K
- Harvard 49/73K
- Tufts 31/60K
- BC 153/38K
- Brandeis 3/30K

I know the naysayers will say 'it's still early' or 'wait until winter' but it is a pretty positive start

[sawyer2]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

In discussions of risks with in-classroom learning, risks to students themselves, as well as their family members at home, are often discussed. What's often left out though, are the risks to teachers and other school staff members, who are not kids anymore, and who are probably less than keen on risking serious illness and death themselves. That's a valid concern.

I don't believe that is being left out at all, and is one of the key drivers behind shifting towards a remote/hybrid model in many cases

[porterhouse]

Originally Posted by sawyer2

I know the naysayers will say 'it's still early' or 'wait until winter' but it is a pretty positive start

Yes. It’s been about a month since one of the resident doom and bloomers told us to give it a month for Allston to explode.

[BostonMike7]

I was talking to my NU co-op today about school policy and testing, and how social life is during the pandemic. She told me that testing is going well. Every 3-days and they get the results back typically in 7-8 hours or so. Many are adhering to the no-party policy and everything was going well.

But then we started talking about peers and other schools.

"Yeah, I know 4-5 people who tested positive at other schools that are still going out and partying. Pretty sure my friend hooked up with some guy after her positive test"

[sawyer2]

Originally Posted by BostonMike7

I was talking to my NU co-op today about school policy and testing, and how social life is during the pandemic. She told me that testing is going well. Every 3-days and they get the results back typically in 7-8 hours or so. Many are adhering to the no-party policy and everything was going well.

But then we started talking about peers and other schools.

"Yeah, I know 4-5 people who tested positive at other schools that are still going out and partying. Pretty sure my friend hooked up with some guy after her positive test"

The anecdotes are scary, the data (thus far) not so much