For WHOm the Bell Tolls - Covid-19 #11

[Ran]

It is incredibly ambitious. Have they the possibility of adopting any of the tracking technologies used by South Korea or offered by Google? I don't see how it's feasible without it, and obviously there are privacy concerns.

[Jeor]

I'm having trouble understanding the practicalities of tracing and tracking on a large scale.

I understand the Singaporean model - once someone is infected, ruthlessly follow up where they've been and who they've been in contact with and start a whole web of isolations from there to cauterize the outbreak.

For a small number of cases, that's quite possible. But how do you do that for 3000 people?

Even with technology, are we talking a system where it's like police monitoring ankle bracelets and then barging down the doors when there's a violation?

[Ran]

Just now, Jeor said:

Even with technology, are we talking a system where it's like police monitoring ankle bracelets and then barging down the doors when there's a violation?

To be honest, I'm really dubious but we'll see what the health authorities and government actually intend to do. China could do it, but China is an authoritarian state with pervasive surveillance, few privacy rights which can pretty much all be waived at the say-so of the government, and incredible powers to detain people. I can't quite see how Germany plans to match that.

That said, you don't really need to go that far into social distancing to get R ~1. I'm surprised they have not managed to get under it with all the limitations they've placed on contacts in groups and so on, actually. Seems to me that some measure they've taken may actually be counter-productive...

[Mladen]

I am afraid that this is becoming a new episode of "Black Mirror". I will say this again, tracking sick people, informing public about them, creating some sort of alert system, listing sick people like they are sex offenders, goes against every fiber of oaths we doctors have taken, against every progress we have made in terms of personal rights and liberties. I am sorry, but it is wrong. On so many levels. 

[JoannaL]

I think they are devolping such an app at the moment (so no private company). The idea is that everyone can use that app VOLUNTARYLY. they think a lot of people will do so. The compliance with the rules until now is excellent and it is in everybodies interest that the virus is contained. But there will definitly be no force to install that app or to always carry your smartphone or such. It is designed to be just another tool for contact tracking.

So you can know if you have been at a place where the virus has been and then get a test as soon as possible.

 

 

[Jeor]

11 minutes ago, Ran said:

To be honest, I'm really dubious but we'll see what the health authorities and government actually intend to do. China could do it, but China is an authoritarian state with pervasive surveillance, few privacy rights which can pretty much all be waived at the say-so of the government, and incredible powers to detain people. I can't quite see how Germany plans to match that.

2 minutes ago, Risto said:

I am afraid that this is becoming a new episode of "Black Mirror". I will say this again, tracking sick people, informing public about them, creating some sort of alert system, listing sick people like they are sex offenders, goes against every fiber of oaths we doctors have taken, against every progress we have made in terms of personal rights and liberties. I am sorry, but it is wrong. On so many levels. 

Both of these comments are why I'm pretty dubious about tracking and tracing. In most Western democracies, in the (false) dichotomy of freedom and safety I think you'll get most people leaning towards the former when it comes to self-limiting behaviour like this.

1 minute ago, JoannaL said:

The idea is that everyone can use that app VOLUNTARYLY. they think a lot of people will do so.

The other problem you'll get with a voluntary system is that only the conscientious people will sign up, and they're likely to be cautious people who stay at home. The rule-breakers and nonchalant will not be on any such app and they're the ones most likely to be out and about and potential spreading the virus.

[Ran]

1 minute ago, Jeor said:

The other problem you'll get with a voluntary system is that only the conscientious people will sign up, and they're likely to be cautious people who stay at home. The rule-breakers and nonchalant will not be on any such app and they're the ones most likely to be out and about and potential spreading the virus.

Still, better than nothing.

And that said, the Google/Apple proposed API for Bluetooth tracking sounds quite interesting from a privacy perspective. It has no geolocation, it's anonymized, all the cryptography for keys is done on private phones and not by servers (all the cloud servers do is hold the keys). All it does is tell you, "Hey, a person has revealed they have tested positive, and they say you hung out with them repeatedly over the last week -- may be a good idea to isolate or get tested." I'm not fully sure of the efficacy of Bluetooth being used for this alone, but it does seem to knock down a lot of the privacy concerns.

[Heartofice]

I think were there to be a voluntary app I think a lot of people will sign up to use it, I can imagine it becoming a thing. 
 

Im interested in the process though. I’d say I think I’ve got the virus, I then what? Mark it down in the app, they send me a test? They are tracking my movements from the moment I install the app?

There might be some who refuse the app for privacy reasons but I think there is a general sense that the public wants to do what it takes to stop the spread 

[JoannaL]

8 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think were there to be a voluntary app I think a lot of people will sign up to use it, I can imagine it becoming a thing. 
 

Im interested in the process though. I’d say I think I’ve got the virus, I then what? Mark it down in the app, they send me a test? They are tracking my movements from the moment I install the app?

There might be some who refuse the app for privacy reasons but I think there is a general sense that the public wants to do what it takes to stop the spread 

I think (just my thoughts I have no information whatsoever about this), its the other way around:

They will send you a SMS informing you, that you have been on a bus/at the supermarket at the same time as the virus. Please go get a test immediately, please do not meet anyone until you got tested.

[Heartofice]

7 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

I think (just my thoughts I have no information whatsoever about this), its the other way around:

They will send you a SMS informing you, that you have been on a bus/at the supermarket at the same time as the virus. Please go get a test immediately, please do not meet anyone until you got tested.

I think the problem here is assuming they know where a lot of the infections already are. Lots are going unreported, I don’t know what percentage that is.

Obviously that system would go some way to allowing more targeted testing but I don’t think it’s possible to track all infections or maybe even have a ‘good’ picture of infection data.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

40 minutes ago, Risto said:

I am afraid that this is becoming a new episode of "Black Mirror". I will say this again, tracking sick people, informing public about them, creating some sort of alert system, listing sick people like they are sex offenders, goes against every fiber of oaths we doctors have taken, against every progress we have made in terms of personal rights and liberties. I am sorry, but it is wrong. On so many levels. 

Welcome to the brave new world.

ETA: Listening to this college prof advocating for even more extreme measures is frightening, and the argument that young people probably don't care because they grew up in a digital world just shows me how full of shit he is. He wants all to be tracked digitally and for there to be facial recognition everywhere you go.

The elites are really making a killing over this, on so many levels. 

[JoannaL]

5 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

 

Obviously that system would go some way to allowing more targeted testing but I don’t think it’s possible to track all infections or maybe even have a ‘good’ picture of infection data.

Yes, thats the main problem, that is why I think Merkel is quite ambitious with the goal of tracking. I don't know if it is doable.

But the idea is that herd immunity can not be reached without unnecessary suffering (because if you flatten the curve not enough the health care system gets overwhelmed, but if you flatten it enough you have to do this for 4-5 years (or at least until there is a vaccine) and that will kill the economy). So you do not have a good alternative to trying to track it., so get all out and track it.

[Jeor]

2 minutes ago, JoannaL said:

But the idea is that herd immunity can not be reached without unnecessary suffering (because if you flatten the curve not enough the health care system gets overwhelmed, but if you flatten it enough you have to do this for 4-5 years (or at least until there is a vaccine) and that will kill the economy). So you do not have a good alternative to trying to track it., so get all out and track it.

Yes, short of herd immunity or a vaccine there is no clear way through.

So it's probably not a surprise that "track and trace" is becoming a much-touted strategy. I have my doubts about its effectiveness on a large scale, but in the absence of anything better (i.e. vaccine) I guess it makes sense to dial up whatever options you have, because at least you're doing something.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, Jeor said:

Yes, short of herd immunity or a vaccine there is no clear way through.

So it's probably not a surprise that "track and trace" is becoming a much-touted strategy. I have my doubts about its effectiveness on a large scale, but in the absence of anything better (i.e. vaccine) I guess it makes sense to dial up whatever options you have, because at least you're doing something.

And will this track and trace end when the virus is contained, and eventually vaccinated? 

We're going to take the concept of "actually, you're the product" to whole new levels if we go through with this. 

[Heartofice]

I think if the goal is to wipe out the virus completely then this won’t work. But as a way of minimising cases and flattening the curve then it will definitely help, especially if it allows life to go back to normal somewhat 

[JoannaL]

9 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think if the goal is to wipe out the virus completely then this won’t work. But as a way of minimising cases and flattening the curve then it will definitely help, especially if it allows life to go back to normal somewhat 

Exactly, the idea is that by putting much more pressure on the virus, there is also a way out of lock-down (it is cheaper to go all out on testing and tracking than to destroy your economy by being in continous/or repeated lock-down)

[The Anti-Targ]

44 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

I think if the goal is to wipe out the virus completely then this won’t work. But as a way of minimising cases and flattening the curve then it will definitely help, especially if it allows life to go back to normal somewhat 

Yeah, that's not happening globally nor in most countries. It could be wiped out in some countries that still have very low amounts of community spread but even then it takes a lot of effort. And if cats are a reservoir host, which is possible but more science needs to be done, it makes it even harder.

There's a chance of eradicating it in New Zealand, but some people think it's pie in the sky and not worth bothering to try. I don't agree I think it can be done here, but what needs to be done might not be entirely palatable to the public because it means prolonging social distancing measures. Not to the extent they are right now, but at one step down for an extended period. I think it's worth a try, others don't.

[Heartofice]

Even in somewhere like New Zealand I don’t see how you can prevent the disease being brought back into the country at a later date. You won’t ever be able to check every single person and item coming into the country. You can’t just identify travellers from certain areas because it’s already too widespread.

[Jeor]

21 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Even in somewhere like New Zealand I don’t see how you can prevent the disease being brought back into the country at a later date. You won’t ever be able to check every single person and item coming into the country. You can’t just identify travellers from certain areas because it’s already too widespread.

I think the game plan for New Zealand (and perhaps later on down the track in Australia, which is also now getting down to low double digits in new cases) is that once the virus is stamped out completely (perhaps pie in the sky, but I think not impossible), close the borders indefinitely until a vaccine is found. Both are island nations with good control over their borders; if you shut off the airlines and the ports, then they can seal the country off. Then it's hunker down and wait for a vaccine.

 

[ljkeane]

1 minute ago, Jeor said:

I think the game plan for New Zealand (and perhaps later on down the track in Australia, which is also now getting down to low double digits in new cases) is that once the virus is stamped out completely (perhaps pie in the sky, but I think not impossible), close the borders indefinitely until a vaccine is found. Both are island nations with good control over their borders; if you shut off the airlines and the ports, then they can seal the country off. Then it's hunker down and wait for a vaccine.

 

How feasible or not that is probably depends on how long it takes to find a vaccine though. If we're talking 12 months or so that might be a viable option. If it's 3 or 4 years is that something the New Zealand economy can take? I don't know for sure but I'd expect it's probably not.