How COVID-19 Is Accelerating the Shift Toward a Quantified Society

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Jesse Hirsh: “The COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating global digital transformation and the adoption of digital technologies. It is also enacting a political and cultural shift toward a quantified society: a society in which measurement and predictive modelling dominate (political) decision making, and where surveillance is expansive and pervasive.

While viruses and disease have always been with us, what’s changing is our ability to measure and understand them. This ability comes at a time when globalization (and, by extension, climate change) has transformed the kinds of viruses and diseases we will face.

The knowledge of what can kill us — or is killing us — compels governments and health authorities to both take action in response and gather more data to understand the threat. Like many disasters or other globally impactful events, the COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating the development and implementation of quantification technologies.

Health researchers are now measuring the spread of a virus across the population in ways not previously possible, through the use of a set of data that is ever-growing, especially in countries such as China that have less regard for personal privacy. Canada and the United States are not yet conducting tracking and tracing of infections at a level that would enable containment. This level, however, is due to inadequate staffing rather than insufficient data. Still, the desire for more information remains.

As a result, our ability to measure human health and disease transmission is set to reach new records and capabilities. Through sources ranging from individuals’ use of digital health tools to contact tracing records, health-related data is amassing at a prodigious rate.

What are the impacts or consequences of this dramatic increase in both health data and the perceived value or urgency of that data?…(More)”.

Survey Data and Human Computation for Improved Flu Tracking

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Stefan Wojcik et al: “While digital trace data from sources like search engines hold enormous potential for tracking and understanding human behavior, these streams of data lack information about the actual experiences of those individuals generating the data. Moreover, most current methods ignore or under-utilize human processing capabilities that allow humans to solve problems not yet solvable by computers (human computation). We demonstrate how behavioral research, linking digital and real-world behavior, along with human computation, can be utilized to improve the performance of studies using digital data streams. This study looks at the use of search data to track prevalence of Influenza-Like Illness (ILI). We build a behavioral model of flu search based on survey data linked to users’ online browsing data. We then utilize human computation for classifying search strings. Leveraging these resources, we construct a tracking model of ILI prevalence that outperforms strong historical benchmarks using only a limited stream of search data and lends itself to tracking ILI in smaller geographic units. While this paper only addresses searches related to ILI, the method we describe has potential for tracking a broad set of phenomena in near real-time….(More)”

COVID-19 Tests Gone Rogue: Privacy, Efficacy, Mismanagement and Misunderstandings

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Manuel Morales et al: “COVID-19 testing, the cornerstone for effective screening and identification of COVID-19 cases, remains paramount as an intervention tool to curb the spread of COVID-19 both at local and national levels. However, the speed at which the pandemic struck and the response was rolled out, the widespread impact on healthcare infrastructure, the lack of sufficient preparation within the public health system, and the complexity of the crisis led to utter confusion among test-takers. Invasion of privacy remains a crucial concern. The user experience of test takers remains low. User friction affects user behavior and discourages participation in testing programs. Test efficacy has been overstated. Test results are poorly understood resulting in inappropriate follow-up recommendations. Herein, we review the current landscape of COVID-19 testing, identify four key challenges, and discuss the consequences of the failure to address these challenges. The current infrastructure around testing and information propagation is highly privacy-invasive and does not leverage scalable digital components. In this work, we discuss challenges complicating the existing covid-19 testing ecosystem and highlight the need to improve the testing experience for the user and reduce privacy invasions. Digital tools will play a critical role in resolving these challenges….(More)”.

COVID-19, Death Records and the Public Interest: Now is the Time to Push for Transparency

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Amy Kristin Sanders at the Journal of Civic Information: “As the U.S. has grappled with COVID-19, the government has resisted repeated requests to follow open records laws, which are essential to transparency. Current efforts to reduce access to death records and other public information amid the pandemic jeopardizes government accountability and undermines the public’s trust. Given that COVID-19 has disproportionately affected low-income Americans, incarcerated populations and people of color, access to government-held data has serious implications for social justice. Importantly, those goals can be met without violating personal privacy. After analyzing state open records laws, court decisions and attorney general opinions, the author has developed a set of best practices for advocating access to death records to provide journalists and government watchdogs with important public health information that’s squarely in the public interest….(More)”.

Challenging the ‘Great Reset’ theory of pandemics

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Mark Honigsbaum: “Few events are as compelling as an epidemic. When sufficiently severe, an epidemic evokes responses from every sector of society, laying bare social and economic fault lines and presenting politicians with fraught medical and moral choices. In the most extreme cases, an epidemic can foment a full-blown political crisis. Thus, Thucydides describes how the repeated visitations of plague to Athens in 430-426 BC provoked widespread social disorder and the breakdown of civic norms.

‘Men, not knowing what was to become of them, became utterly careless of everything, whether sacred or profane,’ writes Thucydides. ‘All the burial rites before in use were entirely upset and… many had recourse to the most shameless sepulchres.’

As the plague progresses, Thucydides describes how Athenians were swept up in a wave of hedonism and lawlessness, threatening the foundations of Athenian democracy: ‘Men now coolly ventured on what they had formerly done in a corner… fear of gods or law of man there was none to restrain them.’

The resulting crisis, Thucydides claimed, undermined Athenians’ faith in the rule of law and the democratic principles that underpinned the Greek city state, paving the way for the installation of a Spartan oligarchy known as the Thirty Tyrants. Even though the Spartans were later ejected, Athens never regained its confidence.

Covid-19 appears to have engendered a similar crisis in our world, the main difference being in scale. Whereas the crisis Thucydides describes was confined to Athens, the coronavirus pandemic has destabilized governments from Brazil to Belarus, not just that of a 5th century city-state. The political reckoning has been particularly rapid in the United States, where Donald Trump’s inability or unwillingness to check the spread of the coronavirus was a key factor in his recent election defeat. Now, the lockdowns and social distancing measures look set to plunge the world into the worst economic depression since the 1930s, raising the spectre of further political instability.

Given the wide-ranging social, economic and political impacts of Covid-19, it is natural to assume that the same must have been true of past epidemics and pandemics. But is this the case? Do pandemics really have the historical impacts that are often claimed for them or are these claims simply the product of particular narratives and readings of history? …(More)”.

Getting Everyone Vaccinated, With ‘Nudges’ and Charity Auctions

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Richard Thaler at the New York Times: “The good news is that safe and effective vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer appear to be on the way soon and that more are likely to follow.

The bad news is an usual combination: There won’t be enough vaccine on hand to meet initial demand, yet there is also a need to urge everyone to get shots.

I have some suggestions: An unusual type of charity auction, a bit of technology and a few nudges can help….

Economic theory offers a standard method for dealing with shortages. It is, basically: Let markets work. This would mean that those willing to pay the most would get the vaccine first.

Wisely, policymakers are not following this course. Nurses, other frontline workers and most nursing home residents could not win a bidding battle with billionaires. And, to be clear, they should not have to!

Yet there is a small but useful role that prices might play in determining who gets priority in the second round of vaccines, after the first 20 million people have gotten their shots.

At that point, perhaps sometime early this winter, suppose a small proportion of doses are sold in what would amount to a charity auction.

Who might be the winning bidders? Very wealthy individuals and high-tech companies are likely to account for some of the demand, along with businesses that employ high-profile talent like professional athletes and entertainers.

Just imagine how much the National Basketball Association, whose season will start around Christmas, would be willing to pay to ensure that none of its players or staff would be infected! The same goes for Hollywood studios and television production companies that are eager to go back to work.

The prospect of selling off precious vaccine to celebrity athletes and entertainers, hedge fund magnates and high-tech billionaires may strike you as utterly immoral, exacerbating the inequality this disease has already inflicted. But before you dismiss this idea as outrageous, let me make three points.

First, the very purpose of the charity auction would be to redistribute money from the rich to the poor….(More)”.

What the World’s First Medical Records Tell Us About Ancient Life

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Robin Lane Fox: “The Hippocratic books now known as the Epidemics are entitled in Greek epidemiai. This title does not refer to epidemics as we now painfully recognize them, individual diseases which are spread widely through a population, whether by touch, inhaling, contact with wildlife, eating, drinking, kissing (which the elder Pliny, c. AD 70, recognized to be a means of transmitting diseases) or sex, while remaining one and the same disease. In the mid-fifth century BC, the amiable Ion, a poet and author from the island of Chios, composed Epidemiai which referred to his visits to the demos, or people, of individual city-states around the Greek world. His title has sometimes misled readers of the medical Epidemiai into thinking that their title, too, refers to traveling doctors’ visits to particular places. They refer to such visits, but their use of the verb epidemein shows that for them the word epidemia referred to the presence of a disease in a community. It was not necessarily a rampant disease in our sense of the word “epidemic,” and it was not contrasted with diseases which were endemic, a category the authors did not distinguish, but it was certainly a disease at large. This meaning was still correctly understood in later ancient commentaries on the Epidemic books.

By the mid-first century AD, seven books were grouped under this title: the grammarian Erotian referred then to “seven books of Epidemics” in the list of works which he considered, over-optimistically, to be by Hippocrates himself. The title went back to earlier editors, probably at least as early as the third century BC, but it may not have been used by any of the books’ original authors. All seven books share a distinctive feature. Whereas the other texts in the Hippocratic Corpus refer to patients in general, and only once, in passing, name an individual, the Epidemic books are quite different. They contain individual case histories, most of which specify the very place where the named patient lived, even the house or location. They are the very first observations and descriptions of real-life individuals during a number of days which survive anywhere in the world. In Babylonia written case histories of named individuals are unknown.

In China none survives until c. 170 BC, and even then they were presented for a different purpose, to defend their doctor-author’s reputation. In ancient Egypt, cases were discussed individually in the now-famous medical papyri whose contents date back into the second millennium BC, but they never name patients or describe observations of them day after day, let alone locate them at an exact address….(More)”.

John Snow, Cholera, and South London Reconsidered

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Paper by Thomas Coleman: “John Snow, the London doctor often considered the father of modern epidemiology, analyzed 1849 and 1854 cholera mortality for a population of nearly half a million in South London. His aim was to convince skeptics and “prove the overwhelming influence which the nature of the water supply exerted over the mortality.” Snow’s analysis was innovative – he is commonly credited with the first application of both randomization as an instrumental variable and differences-in-differences (DiD).

This paper provides an historical review of Snow’s three approaches to analyzing the data: a direct comparison of mixed (quasi-randomized) populations; a primitive form of difference-in-differences; and a comparison of actual versus predicted mortality. Snow’s analysis did not convince his skeptics, and we highlight problems with his analysis. We then turn to a re-analysis of Snow’s evidence, casting his analysis in the modern forms of randomization as IV and DiD. The re-examination supports Snow’s claims that data demonstrated the influence of water supply. As a matter of historical interest this strengthens the argument against Snow’s skeptics. For modern practitioners, the data and analysis provide an example of modern statistical tools (randomization and DiD) and the complementary use of observational and (quasi) experimental data….(More)”

Chatbots RESET: A Framework for Governing Responsible Use of Conversational AI in Healthcare

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Report by the World Economic Forum: “When a new technology is introduced in healthcare, especially one based on AI, it invites meticulous scrutiny. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of chatbots in healthcare applications and as a result, careful consideration is required to promote their responsible use. To address these governance challenges, the World Economic Forum has assembled a multistakeholder community, which has co-created Chatbots RESET, a framework for governing the responsible use of chatbots in healthcare. The framework outlined in this paper offers an actionable guide for stakeholders to promote the responsible use of chatbots in healthcare applications…(More)”.

Intentional and Unintentional Sludge

Curated on Posted on by Stefaan Verhulst

Essay by Crawford Hollingworth and Liz Barker: “…Both of these stories are illustrations of what many mums and gym–goers may have experienced across the United Kingdom and United States as they tried to cope with the pandemic. We, along with other behavioral scientists, would label both as sludge—when users face high levels of friction obstructing their efforts to achieve something that is in their best interest, or are misled or encouraged to take action that is not in their best interest.

We can think of what the English mum goes through as unintentional sludge—friction due to factors like rushed design, poor infrastructure, and inadequate oversight. The mother is trying to access a benefit that will help her and which she has a right to claim, and which the government genuinely wants her to access. Yet multiple barriers prevented her from accessing the voucher that would help feed her children. Millions of parents found themselves in this situation as schools closed in England earlier this year. All over the country schools ended up paying for food parcels and gift vouchers out of their own budgets to help families who were going hungry.

What the New York gym-goer faces is different. It is intentional sludge—friction put in place knowingly to benefit an organization at the expense of the user. The gym doesn’t want him to cancel the membership, which would mean lost revenue. Even absent the pandemic, the policy would be considered unnecessarily difficult to cancel. The gym’s hope is that people forget, give up, or don’t bother canceling in person or over the phone, or that it takes them longer to do so. This translates into revenue for them, without any of the costs of providing a service. Stories like this have resulted in class-action lawsuits against companies that make it overly difficult or impossible to cancel gym memberships. One lawsuit alleged that one large gym company was stealing over $30 million per month from customers….(More)”.