
Stanford cancels in-person classes for rest of the quarter - myrandomcomment
https://healthalerts.stanford.edu/
======
eric4smith
Gonna be big changes if the outbreak continues for a longer time. Here in
Vietnam, we're seeing what 2 months of school closures mean.

Children go to work with their parents now. My breakfast Pho place has a
little dude who man's the register and is learning how the business works from
his family.

Kids play in the park after morning studies at home.

It's not all sun and roses of course, but it's an interesting forced
experiment that's happening under our very noses. The big losers are people
who see the "school building" as the only way to learn. The winners are going
to be those who embrace methods and technologies that help people learn
without the rote of the traditional classroom.

~~~
mariushn
It was about time to change!

Hope this will lead to

* more Khan Academy-like content

* free textbooks available to everybody in the world

* software companions to help children advance according to their exact needs and level (instead of being stuck in a 20-person class herd)

* online teachers paid by the hour or monthly subscription available for students

* less emphasis on expensive certifications and more on 'what can you accomplish'

What opportunities or hopeful outcomes do you see?

~~~
101404
Not everybody is able and sufficient self controlled to self study off Khan or
EdX or similar platforms.

~~~
dougmwne
Funny, I would say that's probably the most powerful and impactful thing a
person could learn. Better then being force-fed every math concept in
existence. And how would people learn to self-study without incentive and
opertunity?

~~~
watwut
Purely online courses have huge failure rates - even when paid for and run
through same university as in person variant. That is simply how humans work
currently. The younger the kid, the worst it will be.

Incentive and opportunity is something quite different then "there is no other
option".

~~~
icedata
There's the issue. What we need is complete automation, with fully automated
machine-learning based students. This will help vendors attract more users and
raise additional capital, and keep people employed.

------
remarkEon
As all of these closures happen we're going to see a massive stress test of
the modern economy. HN has already seen a lot of comments about the remote
work experiment that's currently in-progress, but the other experiment is
this: what are we going to do with kids when their schools are closed and both
parents work?

A lot of moms work these days, and that's going to make things a lot harder
for keeping kids at home. Not trying to pass any judgement on women in the
workforce, just pointing out that in black swan events like this it makes
reacting to it a lot harder from a social perspective. Consider for a moment
if most women stayed at home: school being cancelled would be annoying, but
manageable. I've already heard from friends (on the west coast) that they have
no idea how to handle this (kids are grade school age, 2nd and 3rd grade)
given that they're both expected to still do their jobs remotely.

~~~
Mirioron
It's normal here that kids aged 7-8 and up usually go to school on their own
and come home on their own. Then they stay at home on (or go out to play)
until their parents come home from work. So, can't you just leave the kid at
home? I've heard anecdotes from the US and western Europe that this isn't
done, but surely you can do that in cases like this?

Edit: I don't see how this doesn't cause a massive hit to the economy though.
Some workplaces will be shut down and if stuff isn't produced then the economy
isn't moving.

~~~
cydonian_monk
Even 35 years ago when I was in the 7-8 age range and still living in my
childhood part of the US, being left at home all day without supervision would
have resulted in a visit from Child Protective Services had anyone found out.
Just being alone on weekend evenings while my (single, divorced) mom went to
her second job was enough to tick off some folks. These days I'd be afraid
they'd send in a SWAT team to arrest the parents and "rescue" the kids.

~~~
yodsanklai
What age is considered ok for kids to be alone nowadays in the US?

~~~
mrep
If you are in illinois, it is 14 by law [0].

[0]: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-
range_parenting#Restricti...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-
range_parenting#Restrictions)

~~~
Mirioron
This is ridiculous. I'm actually speechless by how insane this is.

------
mjevans
I heard the University of Washington (WA state) has done that too.

Edit: Citation:

[https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/03/06/press-
conference-...](https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/03/06/press-conference-
university-of-washingtons-response-to-covid-19/)

~~~
zaroth
University of Washington at least had a single positive COVID case in an
employee. Stanford seems to have canceled two weeks of classes and quarter-
finals without even a single presumptive case on campus?

Presumably all these kids are still living in dorms together and eating
together in dining halls...

~~~
ISL
Stanford is smart. Closing up _before_ cases appear is the very definition of
a precaution.

Source: I work at UW, was very perturbed that classes/operations hadn't been
cancelled when it was quite clear that a case would eventually appear.

~~~
_-___________-_
Shall we close everything up then, just in case? Maybe then we should keep
everything closed, as a precaution against other infectious diseases,
including as-yet-unknown future ones?

~~~
gdubs
No need to invent hypotheticals when we’re dealing with an actual, unfolding
crisis.

The cost of closing schools, canceling events, etc, for several weeks would
have been very disruptive and expensive. But it stood a chance of containing
this.

Now we’re experiencing the beginning of the economic impact _plus_ we’re
allowing this to become a pandemic — and probably seasonal. It’s hard to see
how the cost won’t be astronomically higher in choosing to _react_ rather than
take proactive steps.

And we chose this path with Italy and China already showing us the seriousness
of this virus.

------
brown9-2
Seems worth noting that the quarter would end in two weeks anyway.

~~~
whatevertrevor
Stanford cancels in-person classes for the next two weeks doesn't sound as
dramatic though.

------
shaunxcode
What a shame it would be if this led to the realization that I person was
always a waste of time.

------
narrator
With the CDC director saying that this thing is going to be a regular seasonal
visitor[1], it makes me wonder what long-term impact this is going to have on
society.

[1] [https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/13/health/coronavirus-cdc-
robert...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/13/health/coronavirus-cdc-robert-
redfield-gupta-intv/index.html)

~~~
capkutay
Is there any reason to believe we wouldn't have a vaccine in the next 12-18
months? Multiple vaccine candidates are already entering clinical trials. [0]

If there's a vaccine and a large sample of cases studies on treatment with
antivirals, I'd assume its fatality rate would fall down to regular flu levels
or somewhere near that. Therefore the spread wouldn't be treated like a
pandemic as it is now.

0:
[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-06/moderna-s...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-06/moderna-
s-coronavirus-vaccine-trial-set-to-begin-this-month)

~~~
credit_guy
According to [1] the likelihood of approval for a drug entering Phase 1 trials
is about 12%. So that's one reason to not be too excited. Another reason is
that coronaviruses are one of the causes of the common cold (rhinoviruses
another one). People have been looking for a cure for the common cold for
hundreds of years. It's been challenging. It's possible that the efforts were
not that focused as the common cold is not very deadly. Now that Covid19
appears to be more deadly, maybe the efforts will redouble. But maybe there
are some fundamental reasons it's difficult to come up with a cure/vaccine for
coronaviruses (like they mutate too quickly). I personally don't take for
granted that there will be a vaccine in the next few years.

[1]
[https://www.bio.org/sites/default/files/legacy/bioorg/docs/C...](https://www.bio.org/sites/default/files/legacy/bioorg/docs/Clinical%20Development%20Success%20Rates%202006-2015%20-%20BIO,%20Biomedtracker,%20Amplion%202016.pdf)

------
yodsanklai
These types of measure are expected to slow down the propagation of the virus,
which should at least help hospitals to manage the flow of patients, and
overall save some time. The virus could decline naturally in the summer, or a
treatment could be found.

But all these containment measures will also slow down the economy, which will
have a cost too.

What I find interesting is that it seems a lot of people ask for greater
containment (closing schools and borders, canceling events and conference),
while at the same time, measures such as reducing speed limit, taxing junk
food are hugely unpopular. I think it's similar in the sense that this would
reduce mortality in exchange of loss of freedom and economic activity.

~~~
coryfklein
> or a treatment could be found.

A vaccine should not be expected for ~2 years from what I hear. Of course, not
all treatments are vaccines.

------
yumraj
I just don't understand why the schools haven't cancelled classes in the Bay
area..

~~~
wahern
For how long? A week? A month? If widespread infection is successfully avoided
in a particular region, there's no herd immunity if it circles back again, so
you'd have to cancel again and again and again. How long are you willing to
keep kids out of school? They could easily lose half the school year or more.

Considering that serious complications seem to be confined to older adults and
the elderly (as opposed to seasonal influenza, which is also dangerous for
very small kids), perhaps it's better to let it burn through the population as
quickly as possible. It might be easier to keep the vulnerable population
confined for a short period during the burn; once there's herd immunity
(assuming infection provides immunity, of course) they should be safe.

Stanford students can just do distance learning. The infrastructure for
primary and secondary schools just isn't in place to provide that, so they're
forced to make more difficult decisions about the needs of their students and
the curriculum on the one hand, and the risks to students' families and the
wider population on the other hand.

~~~
mantap
Many kids are cared for by older (60+) relatives. Losing their primary
caregiver is going to negatively affect them way more than having to do school
through the internet. Letting it burn through the population is exactly what
we need to avoid.

~~~
thaumasiotes
It's really not that common for a child's primary caregiver to be 60+.

------
harry8
Investors in Coursera, Udemy must be counting their blessings.

Remote is good enough for Stanford fee levels.

------
gdubs
Relatedly it was announced today that a faculty member at the Stanford school
of Medicine tested positive:

[https://www.ktvu.com/news/stanford-educator-tests-
positive-f...](https://www.ktvu.com/news/stanford-educator-tests-positive-for-
the-coronavirus)

------
meritt
I look forward to HN's resident statistics gurus to explain how the
traditional flu and drunk driving kill more people per year than the paltry 14
deaths in the US and therefore everyone is overreacting.

Edit: Apparently my sarcasm wasn't thick enough so let me make my point
crystal: COVID-19 is a real, genuine threat that's just getting started, but
HN is filled with armchair fuckwits [1][2] who dismiss it because they lack
simple math skills.

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22507532](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22507532)

[2]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22508819](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22508819)

~~~
ryeights
Well, seems you’ve done it already!

~~~
vikramkr
This while "not that many people have died stop overreacting" stuff makes no
sense to me. The whole point is to stop it before more people die. We have
testing shortages and world leaders such as in China and Iran buried need
about the disease, which has led to thousands of deaths. If we wait for 1-3%
of the world population to die before deciding it meets some statistical
threshold to start reacting - then that just makes no sense. We're trying to
stop people from dying - we can't bring people back after they're gone.

~~~
_-___________-_
> We're trying to stop people from dying - we can't bring people back after
> they're gone.

All of the coronavirus deaths have been people that were going to die anyway.
(Edited to clarify: we all do, at least currently.)

The vast majority of them have been people that were going to die soon, if not
of coronavirus then of something else.

Is the mass panic really sensible in the face of this?

~~~
craftinator
> All of the coronavirus deaths have been people that were going to die
> anyway.

Yes, all the doctors in China in their 20s, 30s, and 40s who died were just
gonna die anyways, so who cares? For that matter, everyone's going to die, so
it really doesn't matter, right? I'm hoping my sarcasm is apparent in my tone
here, but if not; your argument is both counter-factual and full of fallacy.

> The vast majority of them have been people that were going to die soon, if
> not of coronavirus then of something else.

Again, this is BS.

> Is the mass panic really sensible in the face of this?

Panic isn't, but taking quick, decisive, and committed action is the only way
that a crisis can be averted. If you don't understand this, I imagine you
haven't had to deal with life or death decisions before. This all may blow
over, but the facts DO NOT support that outlook. They all point to a bend in
the hockey stick, and if we don't have a strong plan of action to mitigate
this, people you know, and people I know, will die.

~~~
_-___________-_
The first sentence you quoted is irrefutably correct, and will remain so as
long as immortality is not achieved.

If you believe the second sentence is BS, please provide evidence.

~~~
craftinator
> The first sentence you quoted is irrefutably correct, and will remain so as
> long as immortality is not achieved.

Glad you agree. I imagine most of those doctors in their 20s-40s had at least
40 years of life left. Really interesting to hear that half a lifetime fits in
your definition of "soon".

> If you believe the second sentence is BS, please provide evidence.

See my statement above, which extrapolates on a fact that you agree is
"irrefutable".

Feel free to respond to my third paragraph as well, so as not to avoid the
most important issue in this argument.

------
myrandomcomment
In Italy:

"The national health institute said the average age of those who have died was
81, with the majority suffering from underlying health problems. An estimated
72% of all those who have died were men.

According to government data, 4.25% of individuals confirmed to have the
coronavirus have died, the highest rate in the world."

It is really really important for people to understand the risk group and take
that into account in their lives and interactions. For those that are young
and health the risk is still low.

The panic level of the general populous does not fit the facts at this point.

~~~
mrtksn
>For those that are young and health the risk is still low

I don't want to be the grandson who killed his grandma, I don't want to be the
guy who pulled the trigger on a sufferer of another illness.

Are the people who paddle this argument of "you are too young and healthy to
die from NCOV-19" are disconnected from their elderly and have no contact at
all with people who are suffering some illness?

Please explain to me because I do not understand your angle here.

~~~
tinyhouse
Do you know how many old people die every day from respiratory problems
similar to Corona symptoms? But until the corona showed up no one cared.
Coming to work sick with a flu was a common thing everywhere I worked. Sending
sick kids to school etc. People stay at home now because there are too many
unknowns. Once it's treated as another flu things will go back to normal.

~~~
mrtksn
Do the %20 of the residents of care homes die spontaneously in a week or two?

[https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/1236532896963280896](https://twitter.com/NickSzabo4/status/1236532896963280896)

