🦠 COVID-19 | A pandemic in the age of distrust | 🤕 2,630,781 | Deaths 183,772
I am a scientist by education, banker at JPMorgan for a few years, then mature PhD student in Chemical Biology at Oxford under the supervision of Christofer Schofield (FRS) and Peter Ratcliffe (Nobel laureate in medicine in 2019). Founder and tech investor focusing on media and education. I care about science, learning and Democracy which are good bedfellows.
📊 Daily Data Brief:
2,630,781 (+79,078) cumulative cases
Active cases: 1,730,271 (+51,208) (this is the number of currently infected patients)
Total Deaths: 183,772 (+7,368)
Serious/Critical Cases: 56,678 (-576)
Recovered: 716,738 (+30,512)
Source: Worldometers
Death curves (updated daily as ECDC releases). Major update with per country graphs now available (Link)
We live in the Age of Distrust (a great Op-Ed by Roger Cohen for the New York Times from 2016).
The prevalence of distrust, and the polarisation which resulted from it, has undeniably cost additional lives in this crisis. And whilst we appear to barely be able to deal at government-level with the first peak of this COVID-19 pandemic and preparing for the second one, it is important that we simultaneously rebuild trust to avoid more catastrophic or non-linear futures. The latter might however be inevitable given the extent of the shock and as some have argued this week the fact that already “we are living in a failed state”.
The list of distrust is long: China, epidemiological modelling, manufacturing ability, testing capacity, government statistics, federal government press briefings, information,… And loss of life combined with perceived failure will only increase all of those facets of distrust. And whist elected leaders seem to master social media and messaging to get elected they appear totally inept when it comes to talking about public health, science or showing empathy in times of crisis. Women leaders (and in particular those with a scientific degree) appear more at ease. As I had written before, and as the name of a leading London institution reveals (i.e. the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine), the issue that government need to deal with domestically was one which they thought they had exported along manufacturing to less developed countries a while back.
In a sign of the times and unfortunately, this pandemic started in China which has a far greater interest in hegemony and power than it has in public health domestically and internationally. And even though the original sinner has and deserves a special place in a pandemic when it comes to truthfulness, it does appear that elected leaders in the West are far more skilled at election narratives than they are at being open and effective during a pandemic. And yet the public would be a lot more forgiving and feel supported if their leaders and the media were unequivocally driven by the side of public health. Election years do complicate matters further in some countries.
And whilst the scientists and medical professionals are making the most of the new information sharing and discussion space that is now at their disposal, it seems that the rest of the media and our leaders make a poor use of these platforms. Lee Hsien Loong (Singapore) and Jacinda Ardern (New Zealand) are two of the most notable exceptions amongst leaders in mixing traditional and new media channels to inform and build trust and rapport with their citizens.
It has become urgent that leaders around the world drop the myth of the strong man (which will only lead to the emperor without clothes) and make the best use of science and empathy to guide their decisions and communication. They also need to accept their failure as Macron did in his last address and start by providing reliable statistics on testing, deaths and objective assessments on second peak, drug discovery and vaccine development to name a few. It should be easy given how new this disease and virus are, and yet it seems an insurmountable tasks for some.
A number of articles today exhibit the seeds or manifestations of distrust, while others show the best that the medial and academic communities have to offer and how mainstream media could learn from them.
There is also a podcast on how to protect the most vulnerable in Africa where agencies and experts are warning of incoming famine and catastrophic loss of life.
Tweet of the day: Jason Patinkin (reporter at VOA Africa) urges his media colleagues in the US to cover the COVID19 pandemic responsibly and using public health over politics as a guide (the whole thread starting here is worth reading)
Video of the day: Caitlin Rivers and Crystal Watson both co-authors of “Public Health Principles for a Phased Reopening During COVID-19: Guidance for Governors” from John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health did a short video on their roadmap to re-opening:
🧪 Gigi Gronvall et al. published “Developing a National Strategy for Serology (Antibody Testing) in the United States” for the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
This is a comprehensive report on an important area of research/capability which is becoming increasingly central to policy formation. The uncertainty and timeline for closing our knowledge gaps are set out early on in the report:
“While serology testing has the potential to provide valuable information to individuals and to public health authorities, there are significant areas of uncertainty that will need to be addressed in the coming weeks and months.”
The first steps in the strategy will need “to ensure accuracy, validity, and comparability of available tests”, so as to get quality data in the serological-surveys from which to derive parameters such as percentage estimate of population infected and subsequently Case Fatality Rate (CFR).
The report is also quoted by their colleague Caitlin Rivers in a excellent Twitter thread on the multiplication of sero-surveys coming out with their quick Twitter peer-review by other epidemiologist (like the one in Santa Clara which was covered in the Corona Daily previously). Caitlin Rivers highlights quite clearly that the accelerated publishing times and unprecedented sharing of articles (including pre-prints) and data by the scientific community whilst welcome present new challenges in science’s interface with traditional media and the public. The sharing should be welcome but the public should not lose track that:
The report also addresses “immunity certificates”. It is quite clear about how far we are from such a capability:
“Given the inaccuracies in available tests and the uncertainty about how the test results correlate to immunity, this is not a justifiable step at this time.”
Nonetheless, and acknowledging that once the capability supporting “immunity certificates” is there, a democratic debate will need to happen addressing the legal and ethical considerations surrounding them. If you read only one section it should be the one titled “Considerations for an “immunity certificate” (Link to summary and Full Report) (this report was discovered in my open-access “Covid-19 x Immunity certificates” feed)
🇺🇸 Orion Rummier writes “Head of vaccine agency says he was ousted for resisting hydroxychloroquine” for Axios. If proven to be true, this is a dangerous and worrisome precedent. Government should not dismiss or hide behind science and should democratically engage with it at all times understanding its evolving nature as pointed in the Twitter thread above by Caitlin Rivers. The claim reported is as follows:
“Rick Bright, former director of the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, said in a statement Wednesday that he believes he was removed from his role this week after clashing with Health and Human Services leadership over his attempts to limit the use of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine to treat the coronavirus.”
It is a serious allegation at a time when science and policy makers need to be working closely and respectfully together. Bright is likely to ask the US Department of Health and Human Services to carry out an investigation in the politicization of his agency. As with the media, all governments should always take the “side of public health” to guide and communicate on their policy. One to watch for. (Link)
🇬🇧 Chris Giles (Economics Editor) writes “UK coronavirus deaths more than double official figure according to FT study” for the Financial Times.
“The coronavirus pandemic has already caused as many as 41,000 deaths in the UK, according to a Financial Times analysis of the latest data from the Office for National Statistics. The estimate is more than double the official figure of 17,337 released by ministers on Tuesday, which is updated daily and only counts those who have died in hospitals after testing positive for the virus.”
This article echoes the article in the New York Times making similar findings for a number of countries around the world. The extent of the discrepancy in the FT survey is significantly higher than the one reported in the New York Times and included in yesterday’s edition of the Corona Daily. (Link)
🇨🇳 Alan Crawford and Peter Martin write “China’s Coronavirus Diplomacy Has Finally Pushed Europe Too Far” for Bloomberg. Europe has historically, and comparatively to the US, been more reserved about its criticism of China. It appears that the honeymoon has ended and that European capitals are becoming more vocal about China’s behaviour during the pandemic:
“Reinhard Buetikofer, a German Green party lawmaker who chairs the European Parliament’s delegation for relations with China. He cited concerns from China’s “truth management” in the early stages of the virus to an “extremely aggressive” stance by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Beijing and “hard line propaganda” that champions the superiority of Communist Party rule over democracy.”
As Europe asserts its public displeasure, the US has taken an even more robust and sensational narratives and steps towards China. There is an article in CNN reporting that “Missouri is suing China over coronavirus impacts saying the country did 'little to stop the spread of the disease'. The Secretary of State in the US went further as reported in an article in the Financial Times: “Pompeo accuses China of destroying coronavirus samples”. It is hard not to see this narrative gaining prominence in both the US and Europe over the coming weeks and particularly during an election year. (Link)
👨🎨 “How did the Bubonic Plague make the Italian Renaissance possible?” is a relevant article in DailyHistory.org for our COVID19 times. The “Black Death” raged in Europe and Asia between 1347-50. Beyond the heavy human toll, it heralded profound cultural, socio-economic and religious changes. The article focuses on Italy and posits how the Renaissance was born out of this period. Equally interesting is how such a lethal period affected the European psyche towards historical authorities:
“The world was turned upside down by the Black Death. The mental outlook of people changed dramatically. Previously, people assumed that the world was fixed and God-ordained. The Black Death overturned old certainties. As we have seen the plague and its devastation undermined religious orthodoxy and beliefs. People at the time were no longer willing to accept the status quo. This change manifested in the numerous political revolts of the time.”
It is hard not to see an erosion of the public trust in federal governments with the multiple failures of the centralised state during this epidemic and the ensuing apparition of new modes of governance nationally and internationally.
However, and mainly due to COVID19 killing disproportionally older population, some of the social mobility and economic gains that the peasants gained at the time of the “Black Death” are unlikely to emerge post pandemic for the current workers. However, Universal Basic Income which was unthinkable and divisive only a few months ago got enacted swiftly and around the world because of the pandemic. The significant of the coming Renaissance will depend on the handling of the crisis going forward and the strength of the second peak. Continued failure of the government could lead to a more violent form of Renaissance. The next few months will be critical. (Link)
📃 Jeff Jarvis (Blogger & prof at CUNY’s Newmark J-school) writes “The Open Information Ecosystem” in Medium. Jeff studies the evolution of the media ecosystem and how the journalism profession should adapt to it and evolve. He is not at all a nostalgic of the pre-internet era and always aims be constructive about digital media innovation.
The academic and medical communities have always been ahead in terms of filtering. The extent to which it has used pre-print servers and Twitter as a review/distribution overlay is case-study material worthy of journalism school. Jarvis’ post might in reality the pre-print of a case study. It is a great read and one which resonates with me having been on the Board of Mendeley and co-founder of Cronycle. (Link)
🎙 Podcast of the day: LSHTM Viral (Podcast by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) focusing on Africa with: “S1E21: Reducing the toll of COVID-19 in Africa: What can be done?” (Link)
“Is Africa the new COVID-19 epicentre? Professor Francesco Checchi discusses his latest paper, using mathematical modelling to look at what can be done in low-resource settings across the continent, and how to protect the most vulnerable populations without the human and economic costs of total lockdown.”
📊 A picture is worth a thousand words: Global (🌎) and local (with relevant flag) visualisation and forecasting tool
🇺🇸 The John Hopkins University resource center was the first one I used back in January they have now made available in their latest iteration a county by county dashboard in the US including information about health capacity, insurance coverage, ethnicity and age breakdown of the population (New York example below) (Link)
💊 The "Map of Hope" provides a geographical overview of planned, ongoing and completed clinical trials. It is put together with data from WHO Clinical Trials Search Portal by the Heidelberg Institute for Geoinformation technology. (Link)
🌍 MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis started to publish weekly death estimates for countries (Link)
🇺🇸 The US Center for Disease Control and Surveillance (CDC) publishes “A Weekly Surveillance Summary of U.S. COVID-19 Activity” (Link)
Google has published a new website to “See how your community is moving around differently due to COVID-19”. They have a lot of data to do so… (Link)
🌎The Financial Times has a data tracking page which is in front of the paywall, looking at cases and fatality curves for selective countries and metropolitan areas/region. It is not as extensive as the Madlag link below, where you can see static as well as animated images for a greater number of individual countries. (Link)🇺🇸Another valuable resource by Unacast ( a data company providing human mobility insights). Their “Social distancing scoreboard looks and compares (State by State and County by County), the change in mobility to prior to COVID19 (Link)
🌎 Country by Country Curves: This is a GitHub made by my friend Francois Lagunas. He has written a script to scrape deaths and number of cases in order to visualise the rate of growth on a logarithmic scale. Great resource (Link)
CityMapper has started to produce City Mobility Index to show how much a City is moving. This is a very good indicator of how well lockdowns are respected around the world: Barcelona (4% of city moving) at one end and St Petersburg at the other end (68% of city moving) for yesterday (Link)
🌎A great resource put together by Ben Kuhn and Yuri Vishnevsky. At a time when we need solidarity and cooperation, I prefer their subtitle “We need stronger measures, much faster” than their title. It’s a simulator on what case growth looks like depending on your community’s measures. Fantastic resource to stir communities and governments to action (Link)
🇩🇪 The COVID19 dashboard for Germany is one of the best around. (Link)
🌎A helpful guide by VOX of the “9 coronavirus pandemic charts everyone should see” (Link)
🌎Data and chart regularly updated by the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. It maps the effective reproduction number (also known as R0) of COVID19. You want to get it below 1 as fast as possible to contain an epidemic. (Link to see charts and more data about your country)
🌎This is a great COVID19 Dashboard prepared by Andrzej Leszkiewicz. Andrzej has also written an introductory and explanatory blog for it (“Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) fatality rate: WHO and media vs logic and mathematics”). I particularly like the country comparison tab, which allows you to track and benchmark the curve of the epidemic (number of cases and deaths) in your country with that of another. Very well done and informative. (Link)
“Going Critical” by Kevin Simler is a detailed interacting essay talking about complex systems, the importance of understanding networks, modelling and how this applies to: memes, infectious diseases, herd immunity, wildfire, neutrons and culture. Must read (Link)
🏛 Notable tracking projects
💊“COVID-19 treatment and vaccine tracker”. This tracker contains an aggregation of publicly-available information from validated sourcesby the Milken Institute (Link)🏛Tariq Krim has started a COVID19 website tracking data about each government policy response to the pandemic (Link)
🏛Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) was launched yesterday. Data is collected from public sources by a team of dozens of Oxford University students and staff from every part of the world. It also looks at stringency of the measures and plots stringency with case curves. A great initiative and resource (Link)
👩💻Mike Butcher (Editor at Large Techcrunch and founder of TechforUK), had refocused TechforUK on the fight against COVID19. It is a very effective hands-on team of volunteer. Do reach out to them. He has also teamed up with We are now working closely with the volunteers behind the “Coronavirus Tech Handbook”. (They are ‘cousins’ of ours who originally created the Electiontechhandbook). Volunteer collaboration at its best! (Link)
📰 Cronycle resource:
Cronycle has made available a number of open-access feeds on its website which I extensively use for the Corona Daily. The four first feeds are:
1. COVID-19 General (Link)
2. COVID-19 x Resilience (Link)
3. COVID-19 x HCQ/CQ (Link) (HydroxyChloroquine and Chloroquine)
4. Gig Economy x COVID-19 (Link)
5. Supply Chain x COVID-19 (Link)
Human Rights x COVID-19 (Link)