Immuni does not take prisoners

Around the Immuni issue, a strange story has been created in the last few days, around which once more apocalyptic and integrated than what more than a simple app is, is a real divisive bank on the Covid theme. There are those who exalt Immuni and those who demonize her, but both sides are probably not useful for a constructive speech on whose tracks the app should remain pending the autumn challenge. Is there anything to work on? Definitely. Is there anything to be thrown away? Absolutely not. Have we made wrong choices compared to other international realities? It would not be said. But then comes the "prisoner of Bari" and the cards are once again disorganized.

We admit some discomfort in analyzing a text that seems to have some too much inaccuracy. And if it is not a question of inaccuracies, then there is a fundamental question to be clarified. The protagonist of the story, in fact, essentially reveals that:

has received notification of risk contact from Immuni although she has not had any contacts (nor has there been any positivity in her region for several days) has been forced quarantined by the ASL despite Immune being well and that story a bit like this We will avoid commenting on the lost weekends and the bright tones of the article, since both are not very appropriate in the face of a pandemic (gulp), therefore on the form it is better to postpone. In substance, however, something does not return:

the lady claims that there were no cases of positivity in the region and that, therefore, the signaling has to be fake. On this, the affirmation is very little credible and, indeed, paradoxically in a position to confirm the goodness potential of Immune because the lady may have been in contact with a person with tuscany (as an example) that has spent the weekend in Puglia, and that the return was positive. No one would ever able to go back to the contact object, if not by means of a tool in contact tracing, which should enhance the role of Immune instead of demonizzarlo; the lady claims to have contacted the ASL, however, the app recommends that you contact the health authorities only in the case of symptoms , therefore, of two things: either the lady has symptoms (and then would have done well to autoisolarsi regardless, giving up the weekend to protect the community), or the lady has no symptoms (and therefore would have done well to not contact yet the local health authorities, but only to igienizzarsi and follow the precautions suggested); the article tells of a day spent in the sea by the lady, and then explain that, according to the lady, “the app warns you of potential contacts at risk with whom you have been close to for 15 minutes in the 24 hours prior to the sending of the alert”. But this is not true. Immune signals, in fact, contacts at-risk that have occurred up to 14 days before, on the basis of the notification of the positivity received from the patient and her indications about the emergence of symptoms. In short, the lady tells an anecdote irrelevant for the purposes of understanding of the history, because the contact could easily have been a week before, elsewhere, with others, in a completely different context; the ASL had imposed the quarantine? It would be necessary to understand why and how, because the only way you could figure out if it is a protocol error, of the managers or, if anything, of the dialogue between the parties: if the lady, for example, has manifested any symptoms, then in all likelihood the sla has called for the isolation waiting to understand how that could evolve with the situation.

Something does not come back, this is clear. The article is about in an extremely inaccurate testimony to be verified, topped by incorrect notions, and comes to misleading conclusions. Immune will have all the difficulties that want to be able to impose, we certainly don't need misinformation to undermine them in path.