By Lilly Gillespie ‘22

Every day, as I sit in class, fully recovered from Covid-19, fully vaccinated, fully boosted, fully compliant with mandatory arrival testing (despite my lack of symptoms), and fully masked, I am reminded that I could have it much worse. I could be taking virtual classes. I could be off campus. I could be dead.

 But these thoughts do little to temper my disappointment with Washington and Lee University’s Covid guidelines and response this semester. Washington and Lee is a liberal arts institution that I chose to attend for its emphasis on academic toughness, critical thinking, and open inquiry. 

 If I think critically about the Covid guidelines I have been compelled to follow, I see no rational basis for them supported by either the CDC or leading medical experts. Here are some of my observations, with the research linked, that have informed my opinion of W&L’s policies:

• According to the CDC, “More than 81% of COVID-19 deaths occur in people over age 65. The number of deaths among people over age 65 is 80 times higher than the number of deaths among people aged 18-29.” Of those deaths the vast majority had multiple comorbidities.

• The linked studies clearly indicate that the young, healthy student demographic at W&L is extremely low risk. This is supported by the university’s own COVID-19 Dashboard which shows the overwhelming majority of students (98.3% to be exact) are vaccinated. In addition, many have had Covid, giving them even greater protection against repeated infection. 

• For adults, Covid vaccines improve outcomes when they contract the virus. The vaccines do not prevent breakthrough infections but significantly reduce the chance of hospitalization. 

• Common breakthrough infections do not excuse the University’s harsher response to a significantly milder viral strain (Omicron). Instead of removing mask mandates and allowing those that fear infection to take personal protective measures, the university insists on a stricter mask policy in all public indoor spaces. I support individual faculty, staff, and students making personal and rational risk assessments. Most students have already made that assessment for themselves, deciding to get vaccinated in April and May 2021—well before the vaccines were mandated—with the understanding that we would be able to fully participate in university life. 

• Even if the measures imposed on students were intended to protect faculty, all faculty have had a broad window of opportunity to get vaccinated. Research shows that, even among those with many comorbidities, vaccination significantly improves COVID outcomes and reduces likelihood of hospitalization. We should not let rare and tragic instances of vaccinated young people dying of Covid cloud our understanding of that statistical improbability.

• While we are permitted to wear non-surgical disposable masks, cloth masks, and gators, experts say these do little to hinder Omicron’s transmissibility. If the school’s policy is indeed to stem all Covid transmission, it would only permit masks effective at doing so. 

• The school has offered no answer for the inconsistency of mandating masks in university housing and at school-sponsored events, while not enforcing them in other close-contact scenarios.

I will assume that the 17 members of the COVID-19 Committee have looked at studies and done their own research. If that is the case, I urge them to share it when sending out guideline emails to students. Precisely citing the scientific basis for their decisions would go a long way in engendering good faith with the university’s primary stakeholders, including students and their parents. While I am doubtful unimpeachable scientific evidence for the university’s masking and containment measures exist, as a proponent of open debate and scientific inquiry, I could be convinced if presented with data and a compelling explanation. 

W&L continues to use blanket policies to regulate students who should be empowered to make conscientious decisions as adults. It is true that we could still have weekly testing, cancel in-person classes, ban all parties, or keep kicking people off campus for having seven people in a room instead of six. However, excusing the administration’s draconian policies by pointing to even less scientific policies our school had in the past enters the realm of fallacy. W&L’s peer institutions may have more restrictive Covid policies, but many larger, more densely populated universities have been able to manage with less restrictive policies. This school educates students to look at all relevant circumstances and evidence when making or evaluating decisions. Simply brushing off the policy overreaction to Omicron would undermine this instruction.

As students we cannot continue to let the administration skate by on its illogical and unscientific policies. The COVID-19 Committee’s insistence on an overly strict approach to Omicron reduces their credibility with the student body, parents, and prospective students. I can only guess which parties are lobbying the committee members most vocally, but I urge my fellow students and our parents to challenge them. We must stop sitting on the sidelines and instead advocate for a measured, moderate, and logical approach to end the pandemic of irrational decision-making on this campus.