19 ms·

Governments Introduce Surveillance Under Veil of Coronavirus Control

145 points by likhuta 7y ago

cobookman 7y ago
The article claims China is a role model. However chinas reported numbers is not their actual numbers. We have no clue if China’s approach was effective. Even today ppl in China are still getting sick. With weekend traffic in Beijing not recovered.
- zabana 7y ago
  I may have misinterpreted the author's intentions, but I think it was sarcasm.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
dekervin 7y ago
I am surprised there hasn't be a bigger spotlight shed on the concepts developped by Michel Foucault around Biopower [0] and the genesis of the modern state. See for example this excerpt of Discipline and punish [1] on what quarantine was like: "First, a strict spatial partitioning: the closing of the town and its outlying districts, a prohibition to leave the town on pain of death, the killing of all stray animals; the division of the town into distinct quarters, each governed by an intendant. Each street is placed under the authority of a syndic, who keeps it under surveillance; if he leaves the street, he will be condemned to death." [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower [1]https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish.panOpticism/ https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish...
mrfusion 7y ago
It’s really hard to get any rights back once the government has taken them.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
kyuudou 7y ago
Dr. Michael J. Burry, M.D. (Vanderbilt), setup a twitter account[1] just to address some of the negative consequences of overreacting to covid-19. He's not normally a social media type, to say the least. [1]https://twitter.com/michaeljburry https://twitter.com/michaeljburry
- altcognito 7y ago
  Yeah he’s pitching that California has already reached herd immunity. The premise is that covid-19 arrived in fall and that unlike everywhere else in the world, it arrived, spread without so much as being noticed at the ER.
  - __s 7y ago
    To clarify why that's a crazy premise: Italy
    - kyuudou 7y ago
      I'd say it's a bit disingenuous comparing Italy with California demographically - we're talking about one of the largest population per capita of elderly who are well-known for living with multiple generations on the same property if not the same household AND who have traditional body language mannerisms that involve lots of hand-to-face and lips-to-face contact. Bit less of all that in Cali.
      - cameldrv 7y ago
        They've done sampled serological tests in at least one town in Italy. If you compare that against excess deaths in March, you get an Infection Fatality Rate of 2%. Perhaps it will be better in the U.S. due to age structure, but perhaps it will be worse due to the high prevalence of obesity and diabetes. Either way, California won't have reached herd immunity until approximately 600,000 people are dead, barring some therapeutic breakthrough.
        7y ago
hurricanetc 7y ago
It’s too bad that people can’t follow simple requests. Governments are forced to choose between allowing idiot citizens to destroy society or to implement draconian policies. Medical professionals are being asked to come out of retirement. Nurses are reusing PPE for weeks. Medical students are graduating early to help. The rest of us are being asked to just stay the fuck home for a few weeks. And we just refuse to do it. Absolutely refuse. Everyone is suddenly and avid walker. So then governments have to choose whether to let idiot citizens ruin everything... or not. I don’t blame governments. I blame all you idiots who won’t stop going outside.
- heurifk 7y ago
  If you want to be cool then you say "fuck the government, fuck the police". Its a big part of the reason, a lot of people want to show off by breaking rules for street cred.
  - iamben 7y ago
    I'm not sure it's that simple. I think most people breaking the rules just think it doesn't apply to them. Like they're healthy, they're low risk, they're good at following all the other rules ("we won't get close to anyone while we're out, we won't touch anything we shouldn't"). I assume it's a bit like washing your hands after using the toilet. Most people do. I don't think those that don't are saying fuck you to society - they just think "I didn't pee on my hands, there's no mess here". I guess if something doesn't immediately affect you, it's easy to think it will never affect you and it's not your problem to deal with.
    - bilbo0s 7y ago
      Thing is though the government is not saying don't go out. You have to go to work, (if you're essential). You have to go to the grocery store. And truth be told, you should be exercising to keep up your immunity and overall health. That's all good stuff. But when you're calling up your friends to go on that errand with you, or to go on that walk, or run, or bike ride with you, that's where I think people are going off the rails. I think the government and public health people probably meant for us to do this stuff alone. So there would be no need to say, "WE won't get close to anyone while we're out". Because you're not out with anyone. Only one family member needs to go to the store. Your bicycling group is still unsafe even if you're keeping 2 meters away from each other. Etc etc. The question is, does ubiquitous surveillance help alleviate this sort of thing? My suspicion is that it doesn't. I'm thinking this is an education issue. A lot of people still aren't getting it.
nimbius 7y ago
the source reporting the US surveillance is kinda murky at best. Apparently the US sources their information from ad trackers and a company called lotadata which has a "geospatial AI platform " if most of the tracking data is coming from FAANG its nothing new, however, it may not exactly be accurate with the latest iphone and android devices which have fairly overt controls for the user to restrict data collection.
- chatmasta 7y ago
  I’m speculating here, but it’s probably a data broker that gets location data from apps that share it as part of an advertising SDK. Users still need to enable location sharing. So the data ends selects for a cohort of people that installs sketchy apps and grants location permission. Ironically, this is probably the group of people least likely to follow social distancing guidelines.
  - dkdk8283 7y ago
    LocationSmart is one such broker. They’ve been featured here before.
- soraminazuki 7y ago
  The fact that commercial companies are the ones conducting the actual work doesn't justify anything, though. The article also explicitly mentions that this has been going on before the outbreak: > The privacy-or-security discussion has been going on for years. With new digital technologies, it is one of the main ethical problems of human society. Still, the coronavirus can push people to solve the dilemma right about now.
jimktrains2 7y ago
> At the ACLU, we have always recognized that, during a disease outbreak, individual rights must sometimes give way to the greater good. After all, when it comes to disease, we are not just individuals but also one big bio-mass. That is why people can sometimes be deprived of their liberty through quarantine, for example. And this is as it should be, provided — and this is a crucial and sometimes violated condition — that the science supports the effectiveness and proportionality of measures such as quarantine. And even if a quarantine is imposed, people do not lose their due process rights, which at a minimum require that they be able to challenge their quarantine. - https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/can-we-trust-the-government-to-respond-to-the-coronavirus-in-a-fair-and-effective-manner/ https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/can-we-trust-the...
- mrfusion 7y ago
  They have a point but I expected them to be doing more at this time. I guess they’d just lose a lot of supporters. From what I’ve read or related Supreme Court cases the quarantined need a definite end date which a lot of these don’t have.
- notyourday 7y ago
  It is difficult to challenge the quarantine if the court functions are severely restricted.
  - malandrew 7y ago
    This is a super valid observation that deserves more attention.
- throwaway0a5e 7y ago
  Unfortunately the ACLU is slowly going down the path that SPLC and NRA (to pick one example from both sides of the isle) went down. They used to be a strong special interest advocate organization but they're becoming more and more corrupted by partisan politics. Likewise a statement of "we know it's not what our organization stands for but y'all need to get on board with what the government is telling you to do" is kind of to be expected. If they really wanted to stay true to their mission they would have either come down on the side of being pro-liberty or they would have said nothing at all.
chrisco255 7y ago
Giving up your liberties here will likely be a permanent choice. Live free or die.
- sova 7y ago
  Wish we could shout "Let freedom ring!" and hit the liberty bell with a mallet, but because of the crack it would likely make a humorous "tink."
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
seeTheAstroturf 7y ago
Death rates are at 0.5%, and it was worth shutting down the economy. Car accident death rates are at 1%. Wait until people hear about that. The bigger shock is when people realize that you can't stop the spread of a pandemic. You can flatten the curve to help hospitals. But soon we will find hospitals are more dangerous than staying at home due to infections and that respirators barely improve your chance of survival. I hope medical loses their credibility big time. Their rejection of math and science in favor of tradition is horrifying.
- simion314 7y ago
  So you assume that yourself are the number guy and know better, so what is the equation that will determine when lockdown is more efficient? what are the inputs in that equation ? Why car deaths would be a factor in why you should implement a lockdown. If you go to a hospital with a illness X would you like a response like "X kills less then cars in our country, until traffic laws are fixed we decided you can suffer and die from X, Have a ice death!"
  - ozim 7y ago
    He is not even that good as a number guy... Current global stats as I write are: 1446242 confirmed, 83424 deaths which in my calculator is giving 5% not 0,5%
    - seeTheAstroturf 7y ago
      Because everyone that has coronavirus was tested?
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - zabana 7y ago
      keyword here is confirmed. Many of us carry the virus and are untested (or "unconfirmed") so that 5% number is likely to massively decrease to around 0.5% at some point if (second keyword), governments decide to implement large scale testing.
m3chars 7y ago
In pop culture people turn into zombies by contact with a virus. Zombies don't think of themselves as idiots, probably because they lost their brains in the process, so actually they don't think at all, they just mumble "ARRRRHHHHG" "ORRRRRSSSSFFFF" and go after other peoples brains. Now this is a sad comment, using the deaths of other people to make a point, but since we're talking about facts I'll go ahead. -- https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105061/coronavirus-deaths-by-region-in-italy/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105061/coronavirus-deat... (14794 >= 60 years old, 12973 >= 70 years old, 775 < 60 years old) These are the statistics of the death toll in Italy, keep in mind the average life expectancy is 83 years in Italy. If it follows the same pattern as everywhere else, most of these cases will probably have co-morbidities as well. -- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/07/new-york-coronavirus-deaths-data-shows-most-had-underlying-illnesses/2960151001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/07/new-yo... quoting: "ALBANY, N.Y. – The majority of New York’s more than 4,700 deaths due to coronavirus were among men, and 86% of all deaths were among people who had underlying illnesses, such as hypertension and diabetes, new state data shows. The statistics released late Monday offered the latest glimpse into how the rapidly spreading virus has impacted New York and made it the epicenter for COVID-19 in the nation. Of the 4,758 deaths in New York since the first on March 14, 61% were men and 39% were women, the state Department of Health reportedon its new data portal. In addition, 63% of the deaths were among those age 70 and older, while 7% of the cases were those 49 and younger. And 4,089 of those who died had at least one other chronic disease, the records showed:" 93% >= 50 years old. 63% >= 70 years old. Of all cases, 86% with underlying conditions that are known to reduce life expectancy aggressively. The average life expectancy in NY is 81years old. -- From https://www.france24.com/en/20200402-for-some-survivors-coronavirus-complications-can-last-a-lifetime https://www.france24.com/en/20200402-for-some-survivors-coro... quote: "As the number of worldwide confirmed coronavirus cases climbs towards 1 million, the number of recoveries is thankfully more than four times the death toll. But medical experts told FRANCE 24 that COVID-19 can cause severe long-term damage to the lungs, heart, brain and other organs – and that for some patients, these complications may be permanent." in an article by Tom Wheeldon, that appeared on www.france24.com, 02/04/2020 - 15:28 Now, given the disease is a couple of months old, how can medical experts come to these conclusions? You would need years of follow-up of recovered patients to even be able to test the hypothesis. Given what we know about lung damage, e.g. from tabaco, and the way our bodies regenerate it's highly improbable that this has any kind of truth to it. It does, nonetheless, increase one thing, fear. Still, this is touted on every major news outlet, by so called experts. -- Regarding the cases that appear on headlines and such, you can see things such as 80 years olds with cancer, dying, in a country where the life expectancy is 81 years, and still the cause being attributed to covid. It's like saying that an HIV patient died from a cold. Going out and catching sun is actually good for you, there's a reason why flu and colds peak from late autumn to early spring. It doesn't take an expert to understand why. Plus, there are countries that seem to have been able to contain the epidemic wave without martial law, so it's certainly not the only viable option - and the question here is, "does this justify what is being done?" - not "should we ignore those that need medical treatment?". Lastly, although the following quote was said in a very different context, it doesn't mean it doesn't or shouldn't apply (even if it was a quote by me): "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".
RandyRanderson 7y ago
"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." [0] https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/rahm_emanuel_409199 https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/rahm_emanuel_409199
- RandyRanderson 7y ago
  Provenance: https://freakonomics.com/2009/08/13/quotes-uncovered-who-said-no-crisis-should-go-to-waste/ https://freakonomics.com/2009/08/13/quotes-uncovered-who-sai...
ngcc_hk 7y ago
You start a war to get more power. You start letting virus to go and start ...
summerlight 7y ago
I'm seeing strong tensions between values considered to be fundamental; privacy, safety, freedom, etc. To me, it looks like COVID-19 has introduced a kind of CAP theorem for civil rights and we don't really have a good answer here. Let's assume an ideal case of a perfect government with a good will. If a centralized authority have the perfect information and perfectly execute a quarantine measure, it will be so accurate that minimizes fatality and restrictions on freedom, but at the cost of extreme privacy invasion. If the government have less than perfect information or execution, you gotta choose either accuracy or recall for infected. The former will give you more freedom of action at a higher cost of life. The latter will restrict more freedom of action which also potentially leads to larger economical disasters, but will save more lives. Even worse, this is not even a ternary choice but more of continuous, multi-dimensional one. Also, the good-will assumption made above distorts the reality in a very incorrect way. The solution space is likely much more complex (e.g. those values are not really mutually exclusive and interact each other in a subtle way) and we don't really understand what shape it is. Neither I know the right answer. But I can say that even values/rights that we assumed fundamental may conflict in the extreme situation like COVID-19 and we don't really understand what trade-offs we're forced to make and its consequences.
maa5444 7y ago
I really would like to have 5g down totally everywhere for 1 month and see what happens regarding the numbers...ppl getting sicker OR healthier..

145 points by likhuta 7y ago

The article claims China is a role model. However chinas reported numbers is not their actual numbers. We have no clue if China’s approach was effective. Even today ppl in China are still getting sick. With weekend traffic in Beijing not recovered.

zabana 7y ago
I may have misinterpreted the author's intentions, but I think it was sarcasm.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

dekervin 7y ago

I am surprised there hasn't be a bigger spotlight shed on the concepts developped by Michel Foucault around Biopower [0] and the genesis of the modern state. See for example this excerpt of Discipline and punish [1] on what quarantine was like: "First, a strict spatial partitioning: the closing of the town and its outlying districts, a prohibition to leave the town on pain of death, the killing of all stray animals; the division of the town into distinct quarters, each governed by an intendant. Each street is placed under the authority of a syndic, who keeps it under surveillance; if he leaves the street, he will be condemned to death." [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biopower [1]https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish.panOpticism/ https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish...

mrfusion 7y ago

It’s really hard to get any rights back once the government has taken them.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

kyuudou 7y ago

Dr. Michael J. Burry, M.D. (Vanderbilt), setup a twitter account[1] just to address some of the negative consequences of overreacting to covid-19. He's not normally a social media type, to say the least. [1]https://twitter.com/michaeljburry https://twitter.com/michaeljburry

altcognito 7y ago
Yeah he’s pitching that California has already reached herd immunity. The premise is that covid-19 arrived in fall and that unlike everywhere else in the world, it arrived, spread without so much as being noticed at the ER.
- __s 7y ago
  To clarify why that's a crazy premise: Italy
  - kyuudou 7y ago
    I'd say it's a bit disingenuous comparing Italy with California demographically - we're talking about one of the largest population per capita of elderly who are well-known for living with multiple generations on the same property if not the same household AND who have traditional body language mannerisms that involve lots of hand-to-face and lips-to-face contact. Bit less of all that in Cali.
    - cameldrv 7y ago
      They've done sampled serological tests in at least one town in Italy. If you compare that against excess deaths in March, you get an Infection Fatality Rate of 2%. Perhaps it will be better in the U.S. due to age structure, but perhaps it will be worse due to the high prevalence of obesity and diabetes. Either way, California won't have reached herd immunity until approximately 600,000 people are dead, barring some therapeutic breakthrough.
      - 7y ago

hurricanetc 7y ago

It’s too bad that people can’t follow simple requests. Governments are forced to choose between allowing idiot citizens to destroy society or to implement draconian policies. Medical professionals are being asked to come out of retirement. Nurses are reusing PPE for weeks. Medical students are graduating early to help. The rest of us are being asked to just stay the fuck home for a few weeks. And we just refuse to do it. Absolutely refuse. Everyone is suddenly and avid walker. So then governments have to choose whether to let idiot citizens ruin everything... or not. I don’t blame governments. I blame all you idiots who won’t stop going outside.

heurifk 7y ago
If you want to be cool then you say "fuck the government, fuck the police". Its a big part of the reason, a lot of people want to show off by breaking rules for street cred.
- iamben 7y ago
  I'm not sure it's that simple. I think most people breaking the rules just think it doesn't apply to them. Like they're healthy, they're low risk, they're good at following all the other rules ("we won't get close to anyone while we're out, we won't touch anything we shouldn't"). I assume it's a bit like washing your hands after using the toilet. Most people do. I don't think those that don't are saying fuck you to society - they just think "I didn't pee on my hands, there's no mess here". I guess if something doesn't immediately affect you, it's easy to think it will never affect you and it's not your problem to deal with.
  - bilbo0s 7y ago
    Thing is though the government is not saying don't go out. You have to go to work, (if you're essential). You have to go to the grocery store. And truth be told, you should be exercising to keep up your immunity and overall health. That's all good stuff. But when you're calling up your friends to go on that errand with you, or to go on that walk, or run, or bike ride with you, that's where I think people are going off the rails. I think the government and public health people probably meant for us to do this stuff alone. So there would be no need to say, "WE won't get close to anyone while we're out". Because you're not out with anyone. Only one family member needs to go to the store. Your bicycling group is still unsafe even if you're keeping 2 meters away from each other. Etc etc. The question is, does ubiquitous surveillance help alleviate this sort of thing? My suspicion is that it doesn't. I'm thinking this is an education issue. A lot of people still aren't getting it.

nimbius 7y ago

the source reporting the US surveillance is kinda murky at best. Apparently the US sources their information from ad trackers and a company called lotadata which has a "geospatial AI platform " if most of the tracking data is coming from FAANG its nothing new, however, it may not exactly be accurate with the latest iphone and android devices which have fairly overt controls for the user to restrict data collection.

chatmasta 7y ago
I’m speculating here, but it’s probably a data broker that gets location data from apps that share it as part of an advertising SDK. Users still need to enable location sharing. So the data ends selects for a cohort of people that installs sketchy apps and grants location permission. Ironically, this is probably the group of people least likely to follow social distancing guidelines.
- dkdk8283 7y ago
  LocationSmart is one such broker. They’ve been featured here before.
soraminazuki 7y ago
The fact that commercial companies are the ones conducting the actual work doesn't justify anything, though. The article also explicitly mentions that this has been going on before the outbreak: > The privacy-or-security discussion has been going on for years. With new digital technologies, it is one of the main ethical problems of human society. Still, the coronavirus can push people to solve the dilemma right about now.

jimktrains2 7y ago

> At the ACLU, we have always recognized that, during a disease outbreak, individual rights must sometimes give way to the greater good. After all, when it comes to disease, we are not just individuals but also one big bio-mass. That is why people can sometimes be deprived of their liberty through quarantine, for example. And this is as it should be, provided — and this is a crucial and sometimes violated condition — that the science supports the effectiveness and proportionality of measures such as quarantine. And even if a quarantine is imposed, people do not lose their due process rights, which at a minimum require that they be able to challenge their quarantine. - https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/can-we-trust-the-government-to-respond-to-the-coronavirus-in-a-fair-and-effective-manner/ https://www.aclu.org/news/national-security/can-we-trust-the...

mrfusion 7y ago
They have a point but I expected them to be doing more at this time. I guess they’d just lose a lot of supporters. From what I’ve read or related Supreme Court cases the quarantined need a definite end date which a lot of these don’t have.
notyourday 7y ago
It is difficult to challenge the quarantine if the court functions are severely restricted.
- malandrew 7y ago
  This is a super valid observation that deserves more attention.
throwaway0a5e 7y ago
Unfortunately the ACLU is slowly going down the path that SPLC and NRA (to pick one example from both sides of the isle) went down. They used to be a strong special interest advocate organization but they're becoming more and more corrupted by partisan politics. Likewise a statement of "we know it's not what our organization stands for but y'all need to get on board with what the government is telling you to do" is kind of to be expected. If they really wanted to stay true to their mission they would have either come down on the side of being pro-liberty or they would have said nothing at all.

chrisco255 7y ago

Giving up your liberties here will likely be a permanent choice. Live free or die.

sova 7y ago
Wish we could shout "Let freedom ring!" and hit the liberty bell with a mallet, but because of the crack it would likely make a humorous "tink."
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

seeTheAstroturf 7y ago

Death rates are at 0.5%, and it was worth shutting down the economy. Car accident death rates are at 1%. Wait until people hear about that. The bigger shock is when people realize that you can't stop the spread of a pandemic. You can flatten the curve to help hospitals. But soon we will find hospitals are more dangerous than staying at home due to infections and that respirators barely improve your chance of survival. I hope medical loses their credibility big time. Their rejection of math and science in favor of tradition is horrifying.

simion314 7y ago
So you assume that yourself are the number guy and know better, so what is the equation that will determine when lockdown is more efficient? what are the inputs in that equation ? Why car deaths would be a factor in why you should implement a lockdown. If you go to a hospital with a illness X would you like a response like "X kills less then cars in our country, until traffic laws are fixed we decided you can suffer and die from X, Have a ice death!"
- ozim 7y ago
  He is not even that good as a number guy... Current global stats as I write are: 1446242 confirmed, 83424 deaths which in my calculator is giving 5% not 0,5%
  - seeTheAstroturf 7y ago
    Because everyone that has coronavirus was tested?
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - zabana 7y ago
    keyword here is confirmed. Many of us carry the virus and are untested (or "unconfirmed") so that 5% number is likely to massively decrease to around 0.5% at some point if (second keyword), governments decide to implement large scale testing.

m3chars 7y ago

In pop culture people turn into zombies by contact with a virus. Zombies don't think of themselves as idiots, probably because they lost their brains in the process, so actually they don't think at all, they just mumble "ARRRRHHHHG" "ORRRRRSSSSFFFF" and go after other peoples brains. Now this is a sad comment, using the deaths of other people to make a point, but since we're talking about facts I'll go ahead. -- https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105061/coronavirus-deaths-by-region-in-italy/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1105061/coronavirus-deat... (14794 >= 60 years old, 12973 >= 70 years old, 775 < 60 years old) These are the statistics of the death toll in Italy, keep in mind the average life expectancy is 83 years in Italy. If it follows the same pattern as everywhere else, most of these cases will probably have co-morbidities as well. -- https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/07/new-york-coronavirus-deaths-data-shows-most-had-underlying-illnesses/2960151001/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/04/07/new-yo... quoting: "ALBANY, N.Y. – The majority of New York’s more than 4,700 deaths due to coronavirus were among men, and 86% of all deaths were among people who had underlying illnesses, such as hypertension and diabetes, new state data shows. The statistics released late Monday offered the latest glimpse into how the rapidly spreading virus has impacted New York and made it the epicenter for COVID-19 in the nation. Of the 4,758 deaths in New York since the first on March 14, 61% were men and 39% were women, the state Department of Health reportedon its new data portal. In addition, 63% of the deaths were among those age 70 and older, while 7% of the cases were those 49 and younger. And 4,089 of those who died had at least one other chronic disease, the records showed:" 93% >= 50 years old. 63% >= 70 years old. Of all cases, 86% with underlying conditions that are known to reduce life expectancy aggressively. The average life expectancy in NY is 81years old. -- From https://www.france24.com/en/20200402-for-some-survivors-coronavirus-complications-can-last-a-lifetime https://www.france24.com/en/20200402-for-some-survivors-coro... quote: "As the number of worldwide confirmed coronavirus cases climbs towards 1 million, the number of recoveries is thankfully more than four times the death toll. But medical experts told FRANCE 24 that COVID-19 can cause severe long-term damage to the lungs, heart, brain and other organs – and that for some patients, these complications may be permanent." in an article by Tom Wheeldon, that appeared on www.france24.com, 02/04/2020 - 15:28 Now, given the disease is a couple of months old, how can medical experts come to these conclusions? You would need years of follow-up of recovered patients to even be able to test the hypothesis. Given what we know about lung damage, e.g. from tabaco, and the way our bodies regenerate it's highly improbable that this has any kind of truth to it. It does, nonetheless, increase one thing, fear. Still, this is touted on every major news outlet, by so called experts. -- Regarding the cases that appear on headlines and such, you can see things such as 80 years olds with cancer, dying, in a country where the life expectancy is 81 years, and still the cause being attributed to covid. It's like saying that an HIV patient died from a cold. Going out and catching sun is actually good for you, there's a reason why flu and colds peak from late autumn to early spring. It doesn't take an expert to understand why. Plus, there are countries that seem to have been able to contain the epidemic wave without martial law, so it's certainly not the only viable option - and the question here is, "does this justify what is being done?" - not "should we ignore those that need medical treatment?". Lastly, although the following quote was said in a very different context, it doesn't mean it doesn't or shouldn't apply (even if it was a quote by me): "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

RandyRanderson 7y ago

"You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." [0] https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/rahm_emanuel_409199 https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/rahm_emanuel_409199

RandyRanderson 7y ago
Provenance: https://freakonomics.com/2009/08/13/quotes-uncovered-who-said-no-crisis-should-go-to-waste/ https://freakonomics.com/2009/08/13/quotes-uncovered-who-sai...

ngcc_hk 7y ago

You start a war to get more power. You start letting virus to go and start ...

summerlight 7y ago

I'm seeing strong tensions between values considered to be fundamental; privacy, safety, freedom, etc. To me, it looks like COVID-19 has introduced a kind of CAP theorem for civil rights and we don't really have a good answer here. Let's assume an ideal case of a perfect government with a good will. If a centralized authority have the perfect information and perfectly execute a quarantine measure, it will be so accurate that minimizes fatality and restrictions on freedom, but at the cost of extreme privacy invasion. If the government have less than perfect information or execution, you gotta choose either accuracy or recall for infected. The former will give you more freedom of action at a higher cost of life. The latter will restrict more freedom of action which also potentially leads to larger economical disasters, but will save more lives. Even worse, this is not even a ternary choice but more of continuous, multi-dimensional one. Also, the good-will assumption made above distorts the reality in a very incorrect way. The solution space is likely much more complex (e.g. those values are not really mutually exclusive and interact each other in a subtle way) and we don't really understand what shape it is. Neither I know the right answer. But I can say that even values/rights that we assumed fundamental may conflict in the extreme situation like COVID-19 and we don't really understand what trade-offs we're forced to make and its consequences.

maa5444 7y ago

I really would like to have 5g down totally everywhere for 1 month and see what happens regarding the numbers...ppl getting sicker OR healthier..