4 ms·

Wastewater surveillance is definitely highly useful and well-intended, but this brings up some troubling questions. The obvious one being: To what extent could

Wastewater surveillance is definitely highly useful and well-intended, but this brings up some troubling questions. The obvious one being: To what extent could an arbitrary (non-infected) person's general whereabouts be tracked through municipal wastewater surveillance, given a large amount of resources?

perihelions 3y ago
Yes. https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/05/human-genomic-bycatch-our-dna-shows-up-in-environmental-samples/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/05/human-genomic-bycatc... ("We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies")
sneak 3y ago
Much easier to track them via their smartphone, which already gives approximate location, and which is already collected in bulk by carriers and accessible 24/7 without a warrant by federal spies. They also have all the historical data so even if your phone is off or not with you they can estimate with a high degree of probability which city you are in at a given time.
tedunangst 3y ago
If there were real time DNA sensors in every toilet, yeah, you could track everybody. But most sampling techniques don't offer that precision.
- NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
  Well, we've got a good start with cameras installed in the vast majority of commercial toilets and urinals. It's not a huge leap to do more.
ravi-delia 3y ago
Essentially not at all, unless they have a weird enough mutation that they produce some protein unique to them. They're tracking this person because the only thing they know about them is the strain of covid they have. If you have a target in mind, literally any other method would be better than getting close enough to sample their shit and then running away and only tracking them on a long delay.
- prepend 3y ago
  So first you have to tag someone with a unique pathogen that is subclinical and doesn’t transmit to others. But I guess if you have that level of access to someone, you can track in other ways. But I think we’re a few decades away from being able to quickly hash every human gene to fingerprint individual dnas within huge populations.
  - bastawhiz 3y ago
    The amount of testing (and testing with accuracy) would be extremely high. Even if it's possible, I can't imagine the cost would be remotely feasible given the sheer number of ways to track someone without searching for their poop in sewers.
    - pixl97 3y ago
      Maybe you're thinking the wrong direction... For example looking for populations that aren't leaving houses.
      - jstanley 3y ago
        If you're trying to track someone who doesn't leave their house, don't you already know where they are?
        cypherpunks01 3y ago
        When I asked above, I was thinking about the problem of locating someone who you know well, but you just have no clue where they are. Something along the lines of nationwide decades-long hunt for the Unabomber, but in an alternate timeline where 1. his identity and his DNA (or his brother's) were known, but his location was not, and 2. he did not live in an off-grid cabin, but instead somewhere connected to a wastewater treatment plant, or regularly showed up in one. It's a far-fetched scenario, but I don't know enough about the breakdown of DNA in wastewater to know if it'd be possible to locate him via this method. If he wasn't shedding a unique strain of a virus, let's say, but where his genetics are known. This researcher explained to a reporter how they conducted a binary search of sewer lines from the treatment plant, all the way back to a single manhole which was only fed by a single employer with 30 employees. I just don't know if this is only possible using viral RNA, or if anyone's DNA would be possible to search on in a similar manner. For good public health reasons, we're likely to have continual wastewater surveillance at all major plants going forward - I just don't know how far it could be pushed.
NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
Did you write "could"? I thought that said "should". Hmm.

perihelions 3y ago

Yes. https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/05/human-genomic-bycatch-our-dna-shows-up-in-environmental-samples/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/05/human-genomic-bycatc... ("We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies")

sneak 3y ago

Much easier to track them via their smartphone, which already gives approximate location, and which is already collected in bulk by carriers and accessible 24/7 without a warrant by federal spies. They also have all the historical data so even if your phone is off or not with you they can estimate with a high degree of probability which city you are in at a given time.

tedunangst 3y ago

If there were real time DNA sensors in every toilet, yeah, you could track everybody. But most sampling techniques don't offer that precision.

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
Well, we've got a good start with cameras installed in the vast majority of commercial toilets and urinals. It's not a huge leap to do more.

ravi-delia 3y ago

Essentially not at all, unless they have a weird enough mutation that they produce some protein unique to them. They're tracking this person because the only thing they know about them is the strain of covid they have. If you have a target in mind, literally any other method would be better than getting close enough to sample their shit and then running away and only tracking them on a long delay.

prepend 3y ago
So first you have to tag someone with a unique pathogen that is subclinical and doesn’t transmit to others. But I guess if you have that level of access to someone, you can track in other ways. But I think we’re a few decades away from being able to quickly hash every human gene to fingerprint individual dnas within huge populations.
- bastawhiz 3y ago
  The amount of testing (and testing with accuracy) would be extremely high. Even if it's possible, I can't imagine the cost would be remotely feasible given the sheer number of ways to track someone without searching for their poop in sewers.
  - pixl97 3y ago
    Maybe you're thinking the wrong direction... For example looking for populations that aren't leaving houses.
    - jstanley 3y ago
      If you're trying to track someone who doesn't leave their house, don't you already know where they are?
      - cypherpunks01 3y ago
        When I asked above, I was thinking about the problem of locating someone who you know well, but you just have no clue where they are. Something along the lines of nationwide decades-long hunt for the Unabomber, but in an alternate timeline where 1. his identity and his DNA (or his brother's) were known, but his location was not, and 2. he did not live in an off-grid cabin, but instead somewhere connected to a wastewater treatment plant, or regularly showed up in one. It's a far-fetched scenario, but I don't know enough about the breakdown of DNA in wastewater to know if it'd be possible to locate him via this method. If he wasn't shedding a unique strain of a virus, let's say, but where his genetics are known. This researcher explained to a reporter how they conducted a binary search of sewer lines from the treatment plant, all the way back to a single manhole which was only fed by a single employer with 30 employees. I just don't know if this is only possible using viral RNA, or if anyone's DNA would be possible to search on in a similar manner. For good public health reasons, we're likely to have continual wastewater surveillance at all major plants going forward - I just don't know how far it could be pushed.

NoZebra120vClip 3y ago

Did you write "could"? I thought that said "should". Hmm.