NSW Contact tracing is seriously and dangerously overwhelmed. Even more so it is acting in what can be described as an irresponsible manner.
For example: A shopping centre in Randwick send out an alert yesterday:
Still not shown on Dept of Health web site location page as of posting:
What to do if you think you may have COVID-19, including how to get tested and guidance on what to do if you test positive.
www.nsw.gov.au
And dates back to exposure dates of July 20th, 21st & 23rd.
A little while back I started logging every update made by NSW Health as I had noticed that the delays in listing locations was now at the maximum of 14 days (today - 13 days) which is only how far back they are announced or listed on the website.
So on July 25th, old date added was July 12th, then for the 26th it was July 13th, 27th the 14th, 28th the 15th.
After much spreadsheeting fun:
Weighted avg days prior to listing date is calculated by the sum of (number of days before listing date x number of locations visited on that date) for each date covered in that days 'updating'. If one location is visited 5 separate times on the same date then it is only counted once.
Up until late June the W.Avg days was 2.something, oldest was 5 days.
Now I've been updating this as each new day passes, and thought today I noticed a new venue listed but shown as updated two days earlier, the 27th.
Sure enough the venue was not shown in yesterday evenings listing anywhere. Yesterday was the 28th, so how could it be updated on the 29th but listed as last updated on the 27th?
So I went through and redid the figures for all listings shown as 'last updated 27th July' and found that the number had gone from 93 to 103, yet that change happened either late on the 28th or earlier today.
If someone checks to see new locations/dates added, with a very good memory, had not gone through the entire list
including previous days - then they would have missed these new venues or new dates entirely.
Is this how some of the spread is happening?
That's what I call irresponsible, bordering on the negligent - certainly not helping in the effort to stop the virus spread.
Equally being 13 days behind with the dates of venues listing means up to 7 generations of virus spreading since.
Somebody goes to the website today and sees no venues listed in their nearest shopping area & decides ok, I'll go do some shopping as its all clear. They come home, develop a slight runny nose but convince themselves its nothing as there nothing in the area. Twelve days go by and they see that their shops actually had 7 visits by CV infected people the day before they went shopping.
VS:
The State Govt admitting there is a massive backlog of tests being processed, people being contacted, locations being listed etc etc. The friend who notified me of the Randwick notification, had been there on the 20th, around the same time, checked in with the QR code and as of 6pm had not been contacted nor received a text.
_____________________________
Which would make people a little more thoughtful about whether they really needed to go out shopping every day?
_____________________________
To be fair though. On the 25th, I noticed that there were four locations detailed as visited on the 25th.
This is the 1st & only time over several weeks that a same day listing has gone up - let alone four different locations. So perhaps it was a worker who is required to have the test done every 3 days? If so, very big tick for surveillance testing, given the quick turnaround possibly a nurse/doctor.
On the flipside, the delays in processing seem apparent with no cases listed for the day prior for the 27th, 26th, 21st (3 days prior), 20th. For the other recent days there was only 1 location listed for the prior day. Except for the 28th with 4 locations.
Go back to the 16th & before, for example & 1/4 to 1/5th of all locations listed were from the prior day. Since the 19th it has been less than 1% on average.
www.betootaadvocate.com
www.health.gov.au
www.abc.net.au
