Surveillance during Covid 19 times.

[Missy]

Are we willing to give up privacy for security?
Or is it freedom at any cost?

After 9/11, we gave up privacy for security. Will we make the same trade-off after Covid-19?

The novel #coronavirus has upended the nation’s roiling health privacy debate, with Americans now being asked to accept surveillance of their movements, contacts, and health data.

www.statnews.com

In a span of weeks, the novel coronavirus has turned the nation’s roiling health privacy debate on its head. Concerns about what Google and Facebook might be doing with patients’ sensitive health information have receded, and instead, Americans are being asked to allow surveillance of their daily movements and contacts, and even their temperature and other physiological changes.

By tapping into people’s phones and medical records, researchers and public health authorities are hoping to more swiftly identify and isolate potentially infected patients and corral a pandemic that is outrunning them despite unprecedented restrictions on daily life.

Underscoring the urgency, the federal agency in charge of policing data breaches is now saying it will back off enforcement of certain privacy rules to make it easier for hospitals and their vendors to share patient medical records with public health officials. Meanwhile, the nation’s tech behemoths are collecting health information through Covid-19 symptom checkers, data that could prove invaluable to disease trackers when combined with travel and location data from smartphones.


Safeguarding Lives and Livelihoods in COVID-19
The coronavirus crisis is a world-changing event. Here are seven elements for business leaders to consider as they plan for the next normal.

“There are times that not using the information that we have is morally hard to defend, and I think this is one of them,” said Michelle Mello, a health law professor at Stanford University.

While the relaxing of health privacy rules can be justified during a crisis in which so many lives are at stake, some experts are asking what happens after the pandemic fades. Will we go back to normal, or will the erosion of privacy become part of the fabric of American health care, accepted as the price of continued vigilance against new viruses, in the same way Americans tolerated the loss of privacy and personal freedoms after the 9/11 terrorist attacks?

Fighting Covid-19 Shouldn't Mean Abandoning Human Rights

Democracies everywhere have tried to build legal protections for privacy and basic freedoms. But surveillance aimed at addressing the pandemic could dismantle them.

www.wired.com

While certain forms of monitoring—such as contact tracing—can be indispensable to containing Covid-19, they should remain in compliance with human rights standards. Aggressive expansion of surveillance programs without adequate checks could normalize privacy intrusions and create systems that may later be used for various forms of political and social repression.
Surveillance tools alone cannot solve a public health crisis. Enhanced technical monitoring does not provide rapid tests to patients, protective equipment to medical workers, or ventilators and staffing to hospitals. As democracies build out their responses to the pandemic, they should ensure that their efforts do not also institute a lasting deterioration in human rights.

IMO transparency is key. The Government must be absolutely crystal clear about what they are doing to monitor the progression of the disease and how it is affecting our individual freedom and rights. Free speech must be not only allowed but encouraged and when whistle blowers step up they must be protected from losing their jobs. We must be allowed to speak freely about potentially dangerous work situations etc.
The future of privacy and fundamental rights are at stake.


"
Governments have an obligation to guarantee the right to health and to prevent, treat and control epidemics. In order to do this, they may temporarily restrict some human rights to respond to health emergencies in timely and coordinated ways. However, increased surveillance measures will be unlawful unless they can meet strict criteria.Governments must be able to show that measures implemented are provided for by law and are necessary, proportionate, time-bound, and that they are implemented with transparency and adequate oversight.

What this means in practice is that surveillance measures must be the least intrusive available to achieve the desired result. They must not do more harm than good. "


Where do we draw the line?

 

[elizat]

We talk about this at home a lot. The government already does things it should not and accesses data it should not. I think if the door is opened, even to help this, it will never close. The data will be abused and there will be a new emergency that necessitates we continue to share. I am not ok with the concept. I also don't believe that it would ever be a transparent process on what was being collected and why.

I am not one to give my data away. I refuse to participate in a wellness program at work to lower my premium. Why? Because it requires that an app collect my data of where I go, what I do, how many steps I take, when I go to the doctor, what I eat or drink, etc. I am not uploading my medical records for a discount or points to show I had a physical. For it to be sold. Or submitting to a biometric exam at work for a discount to be sold to a third party. This is bigger than just the pandemic. The data and privacy issue is huge.

 

[Missy]

We talk about this at home a lot. The government already does things it should not and accesses data it should not. I think if the door is opened, even to help this, it will never close. The data will be abused and there will be a new emergency that necessitates we continue to share. I am not ok with the concept. I also don't believe that it would ever be a transparent process on what was being collected and why.

I am not one to give my data away. I refuse to participate in a wellness program at work to lower my premium. Why? Because it requires that an app collect my data of where I go, what I do, how many steps I take, when I go to the doctor, what I eat or drink, etc. I am not uploading my medical records for a discount or points to show I had a physical. For it to be sold. Or submitting to a biometric exam at work for a discount to be sold to a third party. This is bigger than just the pandemic. The data and privacy issue is huge.

@elizat if you didn't vote could you please? Thanks.
I voted choice 3 but based on your reply I am guessing choice 2 for you. Believe me I see all sides. It can be a very slippery slope I agree.

 

[telephone89]

I voted 1, but I don't fully agree with any position. Right now, public health is of the upmost importance. More than any one individuals feelings on privacy. Contact tracing does not need to be so difficult, and I think it could help thousands if not millions of people in the US stay safe.

That said, I don't know if we will be able to go back to "normal" after. Once the capability and data is out there, it will be very easy to shift that to be useful some other way, and a new argument will come up that it's just as important now (for whatever the new reason is) as it was during a pandemic. I recognize that this can cause issues, so I agree with you on protecting whistleblowers and free speech. I think holding "them" (govt?) accountable for what they are doing with our data is extremely important.

So I think public health is more important than my privacy, but I'm also against those car insurance trackers that will lower your insurance by tracking your driving. I don't want the insurance company tracking where I'm going, at what speed, etc, as that is pretty non-essential IMO. In this smaller case, I value my privacy.

 

[elizat]

@elizat if you didn't vote could you please? Thanks.
I voted choice 3 but based on your reply I am guessing choice 2 for you. Believe me I see all sides. It can be a very slippery slope I agree.

I'm actually ok with small things that make sense. Like temperature scanners that are not obtrusive and you know they are there in public spaces. But additional things, like tracking sneezing, respiratory rates and facial recognition? No.

A temperature scanner is akin to courthouse security for me. You know it's there and it's limited. But collecting all the other data, storing it, flying drones over people's homes and recording their data? Not ok.

Maybe a fourth choice? Very selective? I think contact tracing is very important. You can do that without intruding on everyone as well and building a database that someone will hack and sell. But I don't think we need to surveil society at large like some articles are suggesting.

 

[lyra]

Don't want to be gross, but did y'all know that water treatment plants have been checking for COVID in "wastes" for awhile now. Everywhere in the US and Canada.

I would always choose middle ground I guess. But we don't even know the full reach of this virus yet. We might get hit all over again in the winter, worse than the first time, and well before a vaccine. Check my phone records. It stays at home with me. I'm compliant. Anything passive is okay with me I think.

 

[Arcadian]

I feel we give up a lot as it is, and while its mostly to late for me (lol) there are things that I keep close to the chest and private. There's a huge HIPPA concern with knowing too much health data that I feel will never be rolled back.

Already bad enough that net neutrality has been rolled back and that we are already spied upon by our government in the US, but, I see no need for us to turn into China. There are some things that are not a need to know, even during a pandemic.

As soon as you give a little, you've given more than you should.

 

[nala]

What’s the alternative? How else are we going to achieve tracing in an efficient manner?

 

[1ofakind]

I don't even like to give out my real phone number. I am highly unlikely to invite the government to surveil me even if they insist it is for my own good.
I also think they have the capability of invading our privacy already but now they want us to agree to it upfront.

No I don't believe in aliens or that ice crystals from airplane trails are the government trying to poison us...I am a natural skeptic and know that fear is a powerful force that many governments have used to control their populace. I don't want to be the frog in the pot.
I probably Ok with a temp scan but not with tracking of my phone or vehicle to see where I was and if someone within 6 feet of me had a virus. Because then what....??

 

[JPie]

I chose the middle ground option, but all I can think is Westworld season 3.

 

[OoohShiny]

I am not one to give my data away. I refuse to participate in a wellness program at work to lower my premium. Why? Because it requires that an app collect my data of where I go, what I do, how many steps I take, when I go to the doctor, what I eat or drink, etc. I am not uploading my medical records for a discount or points to show I had a physical. For it to be sold. Or submitting to a biometric exam at work for a discount to be sold to a third party. This is bigger than just the pandemic. The data and privacy issue is huge.

Pardon my French... but WTF?

They can bugger right off!!

 

[Demon]

I chose #3, but the truth is, they're probably already doing the surveillance anyway, or will be soon. Very little is private these days.

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

I chose 3.

Obviously I don't want to end up in a V for Vendetta situation but other than that I'm so incredibly dull they will never find anything remotely interesting on me.

I sell my data to the supermarket much to the horror of some people. We have a points system thing. So I get money off my groceries (I calculated and it's like $500 a year) by scanning fly buys for all my purchases. This accumulates points and bonus points which I trade for discounts

They know exactly what I buy. It's actually really useful because I get emails telling me "Hey the butter you use is on sale this week"

 

[redwood66]

The PA needs to go the way of the dodo and anything like suggested in those links is a hell no. I won't let Allstate put one of those driving trackers in my car so I am sure as heck not going to allow tracking of me as related to Covid. Needless to say my answer was 2. If I didn't need my cell phone it would be gone too.

 

[YadaYadaYada]

I vote for 2, even though they can and already are tracking us through our phones there is no way in hell I will install any apps to help them track me or monitor my temperature or anything else.

DH also had a program he could enroll in through Blue Cross where if he did certain health assessments he could get a discount on his insurance, we said absolutely not to that.

I am an extreme skeptic, believe most of what the government pushes is in their monetary interest and has nothing at all to do with what's good for the American people. So I will give them as little as possible to work with.

 

[Missy]

I do feel there is a middle ground. Choice 3. Which I know is open to interpretation.

This virus is vicious. If we do absolutely nothing more people will die. Any life lost is a tragedy.
If we can do something like contact tracing- it can help.

If you make contact with the outside world you have to assume you are being monitored somehow. And if you walk outside your house you are being photographed and tracked by a number of cameras anywhere and overhead satellites everywhere. Your photo is being taken. Before Covid 19.

I say we use the tools we can to save lives because basically we are being tracked and monitored anyway. I know it is upsetting but it is a fact. So use it for saving lives re Covid 19.

Choice 3 is a reasonable choice. I don't want to give up privacy for safety anymore than we have to. Liberty requires security without intrusion but I look at the facts. We have already given up privacy so let's use it to make the world safer from Covid 19.

I agree with Barack Obama regarding this.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

Hehe personally I'm happily drinking the Kool aid sold by our PM. He's been very reassuring that they won't use it for any other purpose other than to track us down if we passed by someone who got sick.

He's selling it really really really well. I'm such a sucker!!!!

Will be interesting to see how many suckers there are like me when they launch their app.

 

[dk168]

As always, I do not have any issue with losing some privacy for the sake of security.

I have always said if one has nothing to hide, then one has nothing to worry about; and have always been in favour of national ID cards for UK.

DK

 

[Missy]

Hehe personally I'm happily drinking the Kool aid sold by our PM. He's been very reassuring that they won't use it for any other purpose other than to track us down if we passed by someone who got sick.

He's selling it really really really well. I'm such a sucker!!!!

Will be interesting to see how many suckers there are like me when they launch their app.

Well I am also one who plans on getting the vaccine when it is available. And I ask this not tongue in cheek but earnestly. Any anti-vaxxers here who plan on getting the Covid 19 vaccine when it is available?

 

[Missy]

As always, I do not have any issue with losing some privacy for the sake of security.

I have always said if one has nothing to hide, then one has nothing to worry about; and have always been in favour of national ID cards for UK.

DK

Yes I agree but I also know that this argument doesn't stand up against the fact that when one gives up privacy one is *losing* security too. If you kwim.

 

[dk168]

@missy I know what you mean. I am thinking more in line with what a country needs to do in order to protect its citizens.

DK

 

[Missy]

@missy I know what you mean. I am thinking more in line with what a country needs to do in order to protect its citizens.

DK

I am on the same page. Just looking at it from all sides. I could argue for either option but for me option 3 is the one I choose for Covid 19 times.

 

[dk168]

I am on the same page. Just looking at it from all sides. I could argue for either option but for me option 3 is the one I choose for Covid 19 times.

I would choose that Option 3 all the time.

DK

 

[YadaYadaYada]

Well I am also one who plans on getting the vaccine when it is available. And I ask this not tongue in cheek but earnestly. Any anti-vaxxers here who plan on getting the Covid 19 vaccine when it is available?

Although I'm not a fan of "anti-vaxxers" because I am not against vaccines in general but choose not to get them myself l, here is my view.

I will consider getting a COVID vaccine but not if it's fast-tracked and certainly not when it first becomes available. This is a new vaccine, we have no idea whether there will be any serious side effects and no I do not consider whatever people they manage to cobble together for a 12 month trial adequate for safety.

 

[Missy]

Although I'm not a fan of "anti-vaxxers" because I am not against vaccines in general but choose not to get them myself l, here is my view.

I will consider getting a COVID vaccine but not if it's fast-tracked and certainly not when it first becomes available. This is a new vaccine, we have no idea whether there will be any serious side effects and no I do not consider whatever people they manage to cobble together for a 12 month trial adequate for safety.

Yes I agree. I still remember the dire consequences when the H1N1 was fast tracked.

 

[YadaYadaYada]

@missy, there was a girl I knew years ago who was studying to be a nurse. She had gotten the H1N1 vaccine and developed narcolepsy. When she went to see her doctor he told her it was most likely from the shot!

I think it was 2009 when the swine flu was going around and they were encouraging the shot, I didn't get it for my oldest son who was two at the time and I remember being really unsure if that was a wise choice.

Now looking back I believe it was but in the moment that feeling of uncertainty is very scary. Especially when you are making the choice for another person.

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

Yes I agree. I still remember the dire consequences when the H1N1 was fast tracked.

What happened there Missy? I just googled it and it seems like it was a legitimate vaccine?

I'm not against vaccines (my child is vaccinated and I got the MMR at 29 in case I wanted to have kids later because I'd never been vaccinated before) but I don't choose them for myself especially new ones. I prefer to wait it out for five years or so before I get it. That's my time frame for being comfortable.

 

[Missy]

What happened there Missy? I just googled it and it seems like it was a legitimate vaccine?

I'm not against vaccines (my child is vaccinated and I got the MMR at 29 in case I wanted to have kids later because I'd never been vaccinated before) but I don't choose them for myself especially new ones. I prefer to wait it out for five years or so before I get it. That's my time frame for being comfortable.

It was just as @StephanieLynn wrote. Narcolepsy was a permanent side effect for some. And I believe young people died. Children and teens. It’s fuzzy for me and we didn’t get the vaccine. I remember it wasn’t on my radar for some reason.

 

[elizat]

I'm not an anti- vaxxer, but I would not consider this until it's been properly tested and it's proven to not have issues. However, I don't get a flu shot either. It is a crap shoot on whether it will even work.

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

It was just as @StephanieLynn wrote. Narcolepsy was a permanent side effect for some. And I believe young people died. Children and teens. It’s fuzzy for me and we didn’t get the vaccine. I remember it wasn’t on my radar for some reason.

Would you get the Covid19 one or wait it out a few years?

Was swine flu declared a pandemic? I don't remember anything about it honestly!