[BostonCard]

Also, the big missing piece is how many contacts did they get from the 70-75% they reached? If the got a grand total of 100 contacts in a week and reached 65 of them, that is virtually useless. Strangely, nobody seems to be willing to report an actual number of contacts for each time period. They reveal the number of cases each day, but not 1)the number of cases contacted each day, 2)the number of contacts obtained each day, 3) the number of contacts reached each day. As a result we really don't know what the effort is actually accomplishing, if anything. This is in addition to the fact we get no indication they are checking to ensure contacts are actually quarantining themselves.

I agree that the lack of transparency into what is being observed with case tracking is frustrating.

However, I disagree that being able to reach 65 out of 100 contacts is "virtually useless".  You can bring a pandemic with an R of 2.5 (as COVID-19 roughly is) if you effectively track and trace 65% of contacts.  The issue is tracking those contacts effectively enough to stop the transmission chain, and my suspicion is that we aren't effective in doing so.  But again, in theory, you don't need 100% tracking; every little bit helps to drive down R.

BC

[BostonCard]

Also, the big missing piece is how many contacts did they get from the 70-75% they reached? If the got a grand total of 100 contacts in a week and reached 65 of them, that is virtually useless. Strangely, nobody seems to be willing to report an actual number of contacts for each time period. They reveal the number of cases each day, but not 1)the number of cases contacted each day, 2)the number of contacts obtained each day, 3) the number of contacts reached each day. As a result we really don't know what the effort is actually accomplishing, if anything. This is in addition to the fact we get no indication they are checking to ensure contacts are actually quarantining themselves.

I agree that the lack of transparency into what is being observed with case tracking is frustrating.

However, I disagree that being able to reach 65 out of 100 contacts is "virtually useless".  You can bring a pandemic with an R of 2.5 (as COVID-19 roughly is) if you effectively track and trace 65% of contacts.  The issue is tracking those contacts effectively enough to stop the transmission chain, and my suspicion is that we aren't effective in doing so.  But again, in theory, you don't need 100% tracking; every little bit helps to drive down R.

BC