有一个NYU 的AP总结了一下： So reopening schools fall into one of four categories: Limited Testing, in Areas with Spread. See: UNC. These were the first dominos to fall. Also see: the University of Iowa—with over a thousand self-reported cases, and a situation that appears pandemic. Or South Carolina, where students were suggested to test on arrival (but not forced), where there are a thousand students now testing positive with a 28% test positivity rate. These situations are already disasters and there are no good options there for University Administrators. Do you send students home, and seed the crisis throughout the state, or would you rather keep students in dorms letting the disease spread throughout the entire student population? Whatever savings these Universities hoped to realize through dorm fees will be eaten up in Class Action Lawsuits in the years to come. Limited Testing, Minimal Local Spread. As an example, see the CUNY system. NYC is one of the safer parts of the country right now—but the CUNY system is seeing ~230 cases according to the NYT University tracker. (York College for instance notes “Not everyone needs to be tested for coronavirus, according to the CDC.” 🙄). Temple University tested on arrival, but not subsequently—in the relatively low prevalence region of Philadelphia (3-4% test positivity rates). They saw cases climb quickly to over 100, causing a temporary shutdown (Temple does also have a number of commuter students). I think it’s likely these schools will deteriorate, but maybe over a longer time frame. More Testing, Minimal Local Spread. These include schools in the Broad Institute Umbrella in the Northeast—BU, Harvard, Babson, MIT, Yale, etc.; Cornell, which put some thought in their reopening plan; and Chicago with a mass testing plan (and isn’t even on campus yet). So far these cases seem to be going well. Schools are generally finding low positivity rates, both on entry and on a continuing basis. BU’s test positivity rate from July 27 onward, for instance, is just 0.13%. Which brings us to the last category: Schools with More Testing, but also More Local Spread. This is the category that UIUC falls into. The University had a really interesting twice weekly saliva testing I was a big fan of. But their latest numbers are not good: 429 students tested positive 8/31 and 9/1 earlier this week. Test positivity rates peaked over 3% last Sunday. 原文在这里： https://arpitrage.substack.com/p/what-happened-at-uiuc?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNTMzNDEyNywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTE4NjE3NCwiXyI6IkFJSDY2IiwiaWF0IjoxNTk5MTk5Mzk0LCJleHAiOjE1OTkyMDI5OTQsImlzcyI6InB1Yi04Mjk2NSIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.lBnuLddZRqL9q3p7IzU-Lqyl1CVLzlrU35r0MPsDlVI 没有充分准备好的学校情况不乐观，变成爆发地。美国为什么就没有能采取隔离？ 劳动节之后估计又是一波。。。。
So reopening schools fall into one of four categories: Limited Testing, in Areas with Spread. See: UNC. These were the first dominos to fall. Also see: the University of Iowa—with over a thousand self-reported cases, and a situation that appears pandemic. Or South Carolina, where students were suggested to test on arrival (but not forced), where there are a thousand students now testing positive with a 28% test positivity rate. These situations are already disasters and there are no good options there for University Administrators. Do you send students home, and seed the crisis throughout the state, or would you rather keep students in dorms letting the disease spread throughout the entire student population? Whatever savings these Universities hoped to realize through dorm fees will be eaten up in Class Action Lawsuits in the years to come. Limited Testing, Minimal Local Spread. As an example, see the CUNY system. NYC is one of the safer parts of the country right now—but the CUNY system is seeing ~230 cases according to the NYT University tracker. (York College for instance notes “Not everyone needs to be tested for coronavirus, according to the CDC.” 🙄). Temple University tested on arrival, but not subsequently—in the relatively low prevalence region of Philadelphia (3-4% test positivity rates). They saw cases climb quickly to over 100, causing a temporary shutdown (Temple does also have a number of commuter students). I think it’s likely these schools will deteriorate, but maybe over a longer time frame. More Testing, Minimal Local Spread. These include schools in the Broad Institute Umbrella in the Northeast—BU, Harvard, Babson, MIT, Yale, etc.; Cornell, which put some thought in their reopening plan; and Chicago with a mass testing plan (and isn’t even on campus yet). So far these cases seem to be going well. Schools are generally finding low positivity rates, both on entry and on a continuing basis. BU’s test positivity rate from July 27 onward, for instance, is just 0.13%. Which brings us to the last category: Schools with More Testing, but also More Local Spread. This is the category that UIUC falls into. The University had a really interesting twice weekly saliva testing I was a big fan of. But their latest numbers are not good: 429 students tested positive 8/31 and 9/1 earlier this week. Test positivity rates peaked over 3% last Sunday.
原文在这里： https://arpitrage.substack.com/p/what-happened-at-uiuc?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxNTMzNDEyNywicG9zdF9pZCI6MTE4NjE3NCwiXyI6IkFJSDY2IiwiaWF0IjoxNTk5MTk5Mzk0LCJleHAiOjE1OTkyMDI5OTQsImlzcyI6InB1Yi04Mjk2NSIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.lBnuLddZRqL9q3p7IzU-Lqyl1CVLzlrU35r0MPsDlVI
没有充分准备好的学校情况不乐观，变成爆发地。美国为什么就没有能采取隔离？
劳动节之后估计又是一波。。。。
大量测试，快速隔离。也不是我的建议，经验教训 有建议也没有用啊，没人听。。。。
你跟南开有啥关系？你名字里面有“飞”字？