Surveillance during Covid 19 times.

[redwood66]

nm

 

[missy]

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!

Yes it was. Like you I’m fuzzy on details and was not worried at all during that time. Here’s more info.

2009 H1N1 Pandemic

A summary of key events of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and the CDC's response activities between April 2009 and April 2010.

www.cdc.gov

I plan on getting the vaccine after it’s been tested and approved but not if it’s fast tracked and they cut corners. As quickly as it makes sense for me. I’m immunocompromised so I have an interest in getting it as soon as it’s safe to do so. I guess it comes down to risk vs reward as so much in life does.

 

[missy]

nm

Curious now @redwood66 lol.

 

[missy]

Why?

Curious as to what you wrote NM about. I’m like a cat. Yanno curious and all but I know it’s dangerous to be curious at times.

 

[redwood66]

Just not interested in debate as I recognize I have very strong opinions about this.

 

[lyra]

I will definitely get the vaccine IF one ever becomes available. I don't think we know yet whether it's possible. It wasn't possible for SARS. I get the flu shot every year. I know I got the H1N1 vaccine. My DD2 didn't get it, and she contracted H1N1. She was so sick that year. By the time a vaccine might become available, it's going to need to be approved by each country, which will likely delay it further. I'm not going to wait. I'll get it when my gov't says it's okay.

 

[missy]

Just not interested in debate as I recognize I have very strong opinions about this.

I’m honestly interested. When I ask a question I want to hear all points of view. Not just those who agree with me. #truth
I am not so foolish to think I can’t learn something.

 

[missy]

I will definitely get the vaccine IF one ever becomes available. I don't think we know yet whether it's possible. It wasn't possible for SARS. I get the flu shot every year. I know I got the H1N1 vaccine. My DD2 didn't get it, and she contracted H1N1. She was so sick that year. By the time a vaccine might become available, it's going to need to be approved by each country, which will likely delay it further. I'm not going to wait. I'll get it when my gov't says it's okay.

I might get it when your government approves it if we can at that time. Right now I trust the Canadian government more than our government.

 

[elizat]

Pardon my French... but WTF?

They can bugger right off!!

Yes, and the crazy part is they actually come to our office to do these biometric screenings. At that time a nurse that is affiliated with the wellness program takes all of your measurements, weighs you, does blood draw, determines your BMI, wants details about your health and underlying conditions, and records it all. Then the wellness company gives you points for participating and then you get an insurance incentive. As a side note the wellness program is not even run by healthcare professionals. It is run by marketing people.

However this is not your doctor. And if you read the disclaimers of the program it does not prohibit them from selling it. In fact it indicates that they have the right to sell it. In exchange for providing all that information you get an insurance incentive towards a points goal and they usually give you free movie tickets... Needless to say I do not participate. they also don't tell you where they are taking your blood or what they are doing with it, other than to test for glucose, cholesterol and the like. But what are they doing with it really? I'm sure they are testing it but they aren't testing it just to benefit you and tell you if you have a problem. They're taking it and using the data and selling it to someone.

 

[missy]

Yes, and the crazy part is they actually come to our office to do these biometric screenings. At that time a nurse that is affiliated with the wellness program takes all of your measurements, weighs you, does blood draw, determines your BMI, wants details about your health and underlying conditions, and records it all. Then the wellness company gives you points for participating and then you get an insurance incentive. As a side note the wellness program is not even run by healthcare professionals. It is run by marketing people.

However this is not your doctor. And if you read the disclaimers of the program it does not prohibit them from selling it. In fact it indicates that they have the right to sell it. In exchange for providing all that information you get an insurance incentive towards a points goal and they usually give you free movie tickets... Needless to say I do not participate. they also don't tell you where they are taking your blood or what they are doing with it, other than to test for glucose, cholesterol and the like. But what are they doing with it really? I'm sure they are testing it but they aren't testing it just to benefit you and tell you if you have a problem. They're taking it and using the data and selling it to someone.

Wow, I would opt out as well. Not worth the cost of admission.

 

[1ofakind]

@elizat That is ridiculous!! But it’s for your own good is what you are told I’m sure.

We do participate in our wellness program but it is at the employee clinic (For DH and I this is our PCP). It is basically a yearly checkup with an incentive to come back to review/follow up on any highlighted issues they find. For example if one tests pre-diabetic they will explain that and recommend a corrective action and a second test in 6 months. We meet with our own Dr. and the goal of the program actually is to give people an opportunity to improve wellness!! We receive the incentive even if they find nothing that needs follow up attention.

 

[elizat]

@elizat That is ridiculous!! But it’s for your own good is what you are told I’m sure.

We do participate in our wellness program but it is at the employee clinic (For DH and I this is our PCP). It is basically a yearly checkup with an incentive to come back to review/follow up on any highlighted issues they find. For example if one tests pre-diabetic they will explain that and recommend a corrective action and a second test in 6 months. We meet with our own Dr. and the goal of the program actually is to give people an opportunity to improve wellness!! We receive the incentive even if they find nothing that needs follow up attention.

That's more reasonable.

There used to be ways that I could meet the points without giving away my data. for example if you met a certain number of steps on a Fitbit and then did silly online quizzes and things like that. The quizzes are quite dumb.

However those incentives phase out and basically all I'm left with now in order to meet my goal for the year is doing the office biometric scan, as well as engaging in mandatory coaching with someone from the program.

These mandatory sessions to get the points want you to pick a health goal and then work on them with this coach for however long, employed by the program. But isn't that why I go to my doctor? And what are they going to do with the data if I do this coaching? Sell it I'm sure. I will just pay more for insurance.

 

[OoohShiny]

That sounds creepy.

It sounds like an all-seeing Supermarket Incentive Card, where people sign up for a few quid off but don't think about the fact they are revealing everything about themselves for what is a paltry pittance of a 'reward'.

What if they are DNA testing your blood and working out if you're in a high risk group for getting cancer, and then in 10 years time, you can't get health cover with Cancer included??

It's that sort of thing that means I won't ever voluntarily do those DNA genetic tests to 'find my ancestors'


We all have our own personal limits to invasions of privacy, but mine are very strict. I resented having to download Skype to videocall for an interview recently, that was then a pointless exercise because apparently I couldn't call without paying money? Thanks for that. I note the 'test' to see if the microphone was working also didn't 'play it back to me' like it said it was going to, so I'm sure they aren't using facial recognition and voice recognition to harvest my unchanging biometric data, noooo....

 

[1ofakind]

It's that sort of thing that means I won't ever voluntarily do those DNA genetic tests to 'find my ancestors'

Ah this one kinda bums me out as I'd like to know some things about/for myself but I have absolutely zero confidence that it will only be for myself. But I'll never do it either.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

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.

im very cautious with who's cool aid i sip and i don't like the flavour in office right now in Wellington, but what can i do ?
i have to trust the powers at be are listening to the right people because the alternitive is me becoming even more stressed out
but i am very uncomfortable with too much of my info being out their in cyper space- how many times have govt depts been hacked ?
once is too often
i don't do facebook or instagram or twitter, im very choosy what platforms i choose to converse on

but i don't want this virus to kill any more people, so i suppose ill download the app if we get one* - so ill save my objections till after we are all safe and well

*very little space on phone
i won't be deleting any Bruce Springsteen

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

That sounds creepy.

It sounds like an all-seeing Supermarket Incentive Card, where people sign up for a few quid off but don't think about the fact they are revealing everything about themselves for what is a paltry pittance of a 'reward'.

What if they are DNA testing your blood and working out if you're in a high risk group for getting cancer, and then in 10 years time, you can't get health cover with Cancer included??

It's that sort of thing that means I won't ever voluntarily do those DNA genetic tests to 'find my ancestors'


We all have our own personal limits to invasions of privacy, but mine are very strict. I resented having to download Skype to videocall for an interview recently, that was then a pointless exercise because apparently I couldn't call without paying money? Thanks for that. I note the 'test' to see if the microphone was working also didn't 'play it back to me' like it said it was going to, so I'm sure they aren't using facial recognition and voice recognition to harvest my unchanging biometric data, noooo....

i definatly agree about those DNA ancestry things
no way id go near them with a 10ft barge poll

the other day on my phone an add started playing audio only asking if Borris had been defleaed
oh man i almost cr***ted myself
was so releaved to see the add today and it was just an 'actor' cat and not our little cutie

 

[lyra]

What could happen with DNA tests? Do you mean someone planting your DNA somewhere? I would have it done, but my docs have it mostly covered and I don't have any questions about my ancestry.

 

[OoohShiny]

What could happen with DNA tests? Do you mean someone planting your DNA somewhere? I would have it done, but my docs have it mostly covered and I don't have any questions about my ancestry.

My understanding is the cheap tests mean you allow them to use your data for whatever (potentially nefarious) purposes they wish - perhaps profiling you and your insurance risk later in life... - whereas the more expensive tests have T&Cs that say you retain control.

I think, anyway - I've not looked into it in great detail TBH.


As someone cleverer than me once said, 'if a product is free, you are the product', and I think that is also true with the word 'cheap' in place of free!

 

[GliderPoss]

I guess I’m middle road....
ie. I would never do a DNA test but would sign up to the tracking app temporarily IF required for the public greater good.

I work in cyber security and believe me - if the Oz government wants your phone data, they can get it but honestly unless you are a terrorist or online bank thief etc they really don’t care. Promise you should be more concerned about companies like Google or Facebook who actively use & trade your data for financial gain.

 

[redwood66]

My understanding is the cheap tests mean you allow them to use your data for whatever (potentially nefarious) purposes they wish - perhaps profiling you and your insurance risk later in life... - whereas the more expensive tests have T&Cs that say you retain control.

I think, anyway - I've not looked into it in great detail TBH.


As someone cleverer than me once said, 'if a product is free, you are the product', and I think that is also true with the word 'cheap' in place of free!

All it takes is someone to buy out the company and since you've already agreed to the first one, the second one can do what they like. That data is worth a mint.

 

[lyra]

The health data can't be used against me in Canada. I don't have to worry about health insurance. It's debatable about life insurance. It's funny in that I would gladly give my DNA for research for medical reasons. I already know what it has to say about me.

Phone data would be useless on me. I leave my phone at home and I don't use it for any kind of transactions at all. Right now I'm not even leaving the house, so that is moot as well. I do have Alexas in my home, but we're super boring and quiet people. We only ask for weather reports.

 

[nala]

Bumping this thread because it is super relevant now that most states are reopening. Would love to know how your city is dealing with contact tracing! And whether you have changed your mind on sacrificing your privacy for the greater good. The poll shows the majority advocating for a middle ground, but what does a middle ground look like? Did the successful countries use a middle ground???

 

[lyra]

Our PM has mentioned today that phone monitoring might be an option, but in a survey, 70% said they wouldn't be willing to download an app. I am reasonable though, I would have to know a lot more about it. We'll see how this goes. If it's optional, I doubt people will want to participate. IDK how I feel about this. It would be helpful in contact tracing. I'm not sure how other countries have done this. Maybe they can just take the info without asking?

 

[HollyJane]

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.

Yeah, I don't participate in workplace wellness programs either and for the same thoughts you expressed.

 

[YadaYadaYada]

CT is starting a contact tracing app called ConnectCT I believe. Here is an excerpt from the CT Mirror:

"Connecticut is partnering with Microsoft to provide the DPH and the state’s 64 local health districts an online tool to speed the tracking of people exposed to the coronavirus after restrictions are eased. Hundreds of academic volunteers also will be recruited".

Anything Bill Gates is involved in is not something I want or need in my life no matter the purpose.

 

[HollyJane]

Bumping this thread because it is super relevant now that most states are reopening. Would love to know how your city is dealing with contact tracing! And whether you have changed your mind on sacrificing your privacy for the greater good. The poll shows the majority advocating for a middle ground, but what does a middle ground look like? Did the successful countries use a middle ground???

Nope, haven't changed my mind. Voted "no."

What I am doing for "the greater good" is to wear a mask when I have to go out in public, practice social distancing and go out in public only when I have to. I have given up (for the time being) seeing friends and family, my widows support group and more and put off handling personal business and building a house "for the greater good."

I do this by choice, because I take this virus seriously, and I care about keeping myself and others safe. I don't want the government to force me or others. For people who are not compliant, I prefer to educate and encourage. If that doesn't work, I get as far away from them as I can.

I'm surprised at the intelligent people I know who don't understand what's going on. They seem to be focused on different sources and what to believe, and conspiracies and politics, and the virus just hasn't touched them or their loved ones yet. I tell them, don't focus so much on the different news sources and politicians. Just understand that you can get this thing and die from it. That's a fact. And, it can spread like wildfire. I tell them to focus on doing what will prevent the contraction and spread of the virus: everyone social distancing, wearing masks and sanitizing.

 

[missy]

Bumping this thread because it is super relevant now that most states are reopening. Would love to know how your city is dealing with contact tracing! And whether you have changed your mind on sacrificing your privacy for the greater good. The poll shows the majority advocating for a middle ground, but what does a middle ground look like? Did the successful countries use a middle ground???

Michael Bloomberg is in charge of contact tracing in NY. I will keep this thread posted as I find out more.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

And I remain A OK with the middle ground (which is open to interpretation) of sacrificing privacy for security. This virus is vicious and in order to be successful against it with minimal loss we do have to start testing and tracing and using what tools we can to save lives and save our economy.

 

[missy]

Contact tracing, isolation have impact, study shows

Comprehensive isolation and contact tracing in China led to faster confirmation of new COVID-19 cases and faster isolation after diagnosis.

www.mdedge.com

FROM LANCET INFECTIOUS DISEASE

A far-reaching surveillance initiative was implemented in Shenzhen, China, to isolate and contact trace people suspected of having the COVID-19 coronavirus. This initiative led to faster confirmation of new cases and reduced the window of time during which people were infectious in the community. This potentially reduced the number of new infections that arose from each case, according to a study of patients and contacts over 4 weeks (Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 27. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099[20]30287-5).

"The experience of COVID-19 in the city of Shenzhen may demonstrate the huge scale of testing and contact tracing that's needed to reduce the virus spreading," said study coauthor Ting Ma, PhD, of Harbin Institute of Technology at Shenzhen.



Dr. Ma acknowledged that some of the measures the program used, such as isolating people outside their homes, may be difficult to impose in other countries, "but we urge governments to consider our findings in the global response to COVID-19."

The study followed 391 coronavirus cases and 1,286 close contacts identified by the Shenzhen Center for Disease Control and Prevention from Jan. 14 to Feb. 12 this year. The study showed that contact tracing led to confirming new diagnoses within 3.2 days on average vs. 5.5 for symptom-based surveillance, and reduced the time it took to isolate newly infected people by 2 days, from an average of 4.6 to 2.7 days.

Eighty-seven people were diagnosed with COVID-19 after they were contact traced and tested. Twenty percent of them had no symptoms, and 29% had no fever. Three deaths occurred in the group during the study period.



The surveillance program was comprehensive and intense. On Jan. 8, the Shenzhen CDC started monitoring travelers from Hubei province, of which Wuhan is the capital, for symptoms of COVID-19. Shenzhen is a city of about 12.5 million people in southeastern China, near Hong Kong, and is about 560 miles south of Wuhan. Over the next 2 weeks, the Shenzhen CDC expanded that surveillance program to all travelers from Hubei regardless of symptoms, along with local hospital patients and people detected by fever screenings at area clinics.


Suspected cases and close contacts underwent nasal-swab testing at 40 different locations in the city. The program identified close contacts through contact tracing, and included anyone who lived in the same dwelling, shared a meal, traveled, or had a social interaction with an index 2 days before symptoms appeared. Casual contacts and some close contacts, such as clinic nurses, who wore masks during the encounters were excluded.

"To achieve similar results, other countries might be able to combine near-universal testing and intensive contact tracing with social distancing and partial lockdowns," said Dr. Ma. "Although no lockdown measures were introduced in Shenzhen until the end of our study period, Wuhan's lockdown could have significantly restricted the spread of coronavirus to Shenzhen."

The researchers noted that children are as susceptible to the virus as are adults, even though their symptoms are not as severe as those of adults. The rate of infection in children 10 and younger was similar to the overall infection rate, 7.4% vs. 6.6%, so the researchers noted that surveillance measures should target them as well.

"This study to me confirms a lot of what we've already known," Aaron E. Glatt, MD, chairman of medicine and an epidemiologist at Mount Sinai South Nassau in Oceanside, N.Y., said in an interview. "It's an elegant study, but at the same time it sends us a message that we're at a critical point of time for us to intervene and prevent cases at the very beginning."


He acknowledged that the Shenzhen effort was intense. "It's always a resource-intense requirement to do such extensive contact tracing, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done to the best of your ability to do so," he said.


He was struck by the low relative rate of infection among contacts in the study — around 7%. "There are differences obviously in infection rates in every outbreak," he said. "Every individual has their own particular infection rate. While we can take ranges and statistical guesses for every individual patient, it could be very high or very low, and that's most critical to nip it in the bud."

Lead author Qifang Bi and study coauthors had no financial relationships to disclose.


SOURCE: Bi Q et al. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Apr 27. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30287-5.

 

[OoohShiny]

Just understand that you can get this thing and die from it. That's a fact.

This is certainly a fact! But I feel we must also remember that the risk of that happening depends a lot on your age and any comorbidities.

In terms of the age profile of Covid-19 deaths in the UK, these are the figures for March:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...eathsinvolvingcovid19englandandwalesmarch2020

Number of deaths due to COVID-19 by age-group, England and Wales, deaths occurring March 2020

England and Wales

Number of Covid-19 deaths / Percentage of deaths in age-group due to Covid-19 (i.e. % of all mortality causes)

All ages 3,372 / 7%
Male 2,068 / 9%
Female 1,304 / 6%

<1 - 0 / 0%
01-04 - 0 / 0%
05-09 - 0 / 0%
10-14 - 0 / 0%
15-19 - 1 / 4%
20-24 - 3 / 10%
25-29 - 5 / 10%
30-34 - 9 / 9%
35-39 - 11 / 7%
40-44 - 14 / 5%
45-49 - 42 / 8%
50-54 - 58 / 7%
55-59 - 124 / 8%
60-64 - 161 / 8%
65-69 - 218 / 7%
70-74 - 362 / 8%
75-79 - 536 / 9%
80-84 - 690 / 9%
85-89 - 611 / 7%
90+ - 527 / 5%

So looking at those figures, 3,372 deaths from Covid-19 in March 2020 makes up 7% of all deaths from all mortalities recorded during that month.


Of the age ranges, 0-29 has seen 9 of the 3,372 Covid-19 deaths, so only 0.27%.

Of the age ranges, 0-44 has seen 43 of the 3,372 Covid-19 deaths, so only 1.2%.

0-55 has seen 143 of the 3,372 Covid-19 deaths, so only 4.2%.

If we look at 0-64 (so kids + adults in average 'working age' range) there were 428 of the 3,372 Covid-19 deaths, which is only 12.7%.


So if I'm interpreting it correctly all Covid-19 deaths represents 7% of all mortalities, therefore:

- 0.27% of the 7% would mean that the under-30s' deaths from Covid-19 represent only 0.0189% of all 'all mortality' deaths.

- 1.2% of that 7% would mean that the under-45s' deaths from Covid-19 represent only 0.084% of all 'all mortality' deaths.

- 4.2% x 7% would mean under-55s' deaths from Covid-19 represent 0.294% of all 'all mortality' deaths.

- 12.7% x 7% would mean under 65s' deaths from Covid-19 represent 0.889% of all 'all mortality' deaths.


Looking at it in the above terms, then, Covid-19 deaths represent an extremely low number for the under-30s, a very low number for the under-45s, a low number for the under-55s, and still a pretty low number for the under-65s.

Comparison to all the 'all mortalities' figures shows extremely low percentages, but I acknowledge that the age-band analysis percentages in the list are perhaps more representative, as risk of mortality in a child will clearly be different to that in a 65 year old, for example.

I acknowledge that the figures will change for April, and that Care Home deaths will be added into the figures, but if anything, that will even further skew the figures towards those over 75.


It is the numbers above, suggesting how low the risk of mortality is in the lower age ranges, that makes me personally think that people in those lower age ranges have really very little to worry about unless they have underlying illness or immunodeficiency concerns, and should therefore be going about their lives pretty much as normal, bar restricting their contact with the older generation. Doing so would enable the economy to start to get back on its feet, and precautionary measures (such as PPE or shielding practices) could be targeted at those in the older and/or higher risk categories.



Of course, we don't know the numbers and proportions of infections across the different age ranges, so perhaps it's possible that no-one under 30 is catching it, for example, but I think that is unlikely given the virulence the virus has been noted for.

Until we have testing for antibodies across a large swathe of the population, to understand the numbers that have been and are currently infected, and therefore the Infection Fatality Rates (IFRs), we can only make calculations and extrapolations based on the limited testing that has been undertaken.

That said, the numbers of asymptomatic cases reported in various places seem to suggest that many more people will have had it than have been reported, which could vastly drop the IFRs and perhaps ultimately show that when considered in the widest context (i.e. effects or lack thereof across the population as a whole) it is not a disease that most people need to worry about, and that it will just be another 'one of those things' that we may or may not die from in any given year as we get older.


To be totally clear, I'm not denying Covid-19 has serious consequences for some who contract it, and I'm not denying it is a rapidly transmitted virus, but the figures suggest that those in the lower age ranges have little to be concerned about and should not be afraid to (or be restricted from) returning to a life that broadly resembles that which they had before the virus began to spread.

We must also consider that although 3,372 deaths from Covid-19 is not a small number, in the same month there were:

6,401 deaths from Dementia and Alzheimer,
4,042 deaths from Ischaemic Heart Diseases,
2,562 deaths from Cerebrovascular diseases,
2,446 deaths from Influenza and Pneumonia,
2,925 deaths from Chronic Lower Respiratory Diseases,
10,916 deaths from Malignant Neoplasms (Cancer??)

so amongst those figures, we should perhaps be expending more effort on tackling those issues!