Seniors learning search engines and navigating our online communities
The summer heat is finally settling in Toronto, Canada. As schools begin to reopen for the fall semester and other facets of daily life slowly resume in parts of the world, it still feels like huge parts of our existence are mostly online. Are video conferencing and other online forums for remote life here to stay? We're talking with former journalist Anika Gupta about navigating our online communities on September 3, 2020. Learn more about the event below, plus information about misinformation training for seniors and your regular roundup of COVID-19 topics explained by our team of in-house medical experts. Have a safe and happy week, readers!
Book Talk: How to Handle a Crowd with author Anika Gupta
Attend 💻 Event Details
8am PST / 11am EST / 4pm UK
Creating and maintaining healthy online communities isn’t easy. Former tech journalist and current product manager Anika Gupta writes How to Handle a Crowd for anyone looking to take their small community group to the next level, start a career in online moderation, or tackle their own business’s comments section.
Your COVID-19 questions
Journalist and medical doctor, Dr. Seema Yasmin shares weekly highlights from Meedan's public health journalism tool, learnaboutcovid19.org.
Can convalescent plasma help treat COVID-19?
Dr. Seema says: "Convalescent plasma is harvested from the blood of people who have survived an infection. This plasma can be given to those who are infected or susceptible to infection as a treatment or preventive measure. It’s a method that’s been used as a stop-gap measure since the Victorian era. But a recent announcement by the U.S. FDA granting emergency use authorization for plasma from COVID-19 survivors seems to be informed more by political pressure than science. No randomized controlled trials investigating convalescent plasma have been completed, and the FDA director overstated the effectiveness of the treatment when he announced his agency’s authorization. The FDA director has since admitted to overstating the effectiveness, despite the President referring to convalescent plasma as a “breakthrough.” This rushed emergency use authorization is reminiscent of the FDA’s handling of hydroxychloroquine in March, after the President publicly pressured scientists. That emergency use authorization was revoked in June when the FDA said hydroxychloroquine was “unlikely to be effective.” Authorizing plasma without solid evidence to back its effectiveness makes it harder to study the treatment which could limit the evidence we need to fully understand its use in COVID-19 patients. Current and future trials might struggle to recruit patients who could receive plasma outside of a trial because of the FDA’s authorization. " (Read more on what our our experts say here)
Are children less susceptible to contracting the novel coronavirus?
Dr. Seema says: "Children appear less likely than adults to become infected with the new coronavirus and less likely to end up in hospital with COVID-19. But new data from the American Academy of Pediatrics shows 74,160 children were diagnosed with the infection in the U.S. between August 6 and August 20; that’s a 21% increase in pediatric cases of COVID-19 in a two-week period. While it’s rare for children to need hospital care for COVID-19, 1 in 3 hospitalized children required COVID-19 treatment in an intensive care unit. The August rise in pediatric cases occurred as schools were reopening. Earlier data showing children were less likely to become infected were recorded while most children were sheltering-in-place and fewer states were reporting data for different age groups. While it’s likely that pediatric infections will rise as in-person schooling continues, investigations of COVID-19 clusters in homes and communities show children are less likely than adults to be the index case. But there’s a lot that we still need to understand. Questions about how infectious children can be, why infection rates are lower among children, and why some children become seriously sick with COVID-19 remain to be answered." (Read more on what our our experts say here)
How many days after exposure should one be tested to yield the most accurate results, and with which test?
Dr. Seema says: "Testing guidelines issued by the CDC in mid-August were radically different from earlier testing guidelines. A person who has had close contact with a person with COVID-19 doesn’t necessarily need to get tested, said the new guidelines, while a previous version said anyone who had close contact with an infected person should get tested. The quiet tweaking of testing guidelines caused confusion among scientists and the public. Public questioning over the revised guidance prompted the CDC to backtrack on its latest recommendations. Some speculated the recommendation to not test those who have been in close contact arose from the overall lack of testing availability in the US where only half the target number of daily tests are being conducted, and where some American are waiting 1-2 weeks for test results. This debacle mirrored an earlier incident where confusion over CDC guidance about quarantine durations and viral shedding also prompted the agency to issue a clarification. Ideally, anyone who has been in close contact with an infected person should get tested. This is because around 40% of infected people do not suffer symptoms and may be unaware that they are infected, and up to half of infections can be traced back to transmission from a person who was not experiencing symptoms. Testing provides important information on two levels: at a community level it provides a better understanding of the extent of virus spread. On a personal level, it gives an individual valuable information about their health. This is especially important given the possibility that the new coronavirus might cause longer-term health problems." (Read more on what our our experts say here)
Top stories
Identifying reliable information online is especially urgent, and especially for seniors. (New York Times)
Media literacy training for seniors, you say? That's the new movement underway amid vast COVID-19 misinformation, which can be particularly dangerous to seniors, who are more susceptible to severe outcomes from the virus. Programs like MediaWise for Seniors are teaching parents and grandparents about social algorithms and how search engines work.
“Older people are vulnerable to misinformation online even under normal circumstances. But the coronavirus has made the problem especially urgent. Older people are more susceptible to the virus, making discerning reliable health information important now...online webinars, classes and videos to teach older adults about misinformation are popping up, from “MediaWise for Seniors,” a program designed by AARP and the media nonprofit Poynter Institute, to “How to Spot Fake News,” a free class from Senior Planet, part of the nonprofit Older Adults Technology Services." — Amy Yee, New York Times
Facebook shares data on Myanmar with United Nations investigators (Reuters)
Facebook says it shared data with the United Nations for an investigation into international crimes in Myanmar. The lead UN investigator previously said Facebook was withholding evidence. The Independent Investigative Mechanism on Myanmar (IIMM) now has data from pages and accounts associated with the Myanmar military that it had removed in 2018 to stop hate speech against Rohingya, but declined to describe the content.
"U.N investigators said Facebook had played a key role in spreading hate speech that fuelled the violence. In 2018, the company said it had removed 18 accounts and 52 pages associated with the Myanmar military, including the page of its commander-in-chief, but preserved the data.
The head of the IIMM told Reuters this month that Facebook has not released evidence of “serious international crimes” with the body, despite vowing to cooperate." — Poppy McPherson, Reuters
What’s new at Meedan
Things We Learned from RightsCon 2020
One is that tech solutionism is still with us, writes our Technology Partnerships Manager, Karen Reilly.
The temptation to answer problems with software is often well-meaning, but the people who will be most affected are not always part of the design process. There was a discussion about health passports during pandemics. Reducing harm to vulnerable groups means any implementation would have to be so narrow in scope and so well-regulated that skepticism is warranted. I was encouraged by the sessions that were led by mental health researchers, because while they were talking about apps to address social issues, they started with recommending existing non–tech standards of care and the need to fill gaps in our understanding of mental health. A panel on gender-based violence, and a panel on trauma mitigation both addressed myths surrounding memory and resilience after experiencing horrible things. Mental health experts should be a core part of software design for human rights work.