Quarantine? Isolation? What’s the difference?

Sorting through the new Covid-19 Guidelines

As this Covid-19 surge tears through our country, many people have taken it upon themselves to take the necessary precautions to protect themselves and their families. This is well and good. It is also a good idea to familiarize ourselves with the slew of new guidance from our health authorities that have been issued in the past couple of weeks or so. Whether from the CDC or the Department of Health, the recommended guidelines are based on the most current knowledge that the scientific community has in facing this crisis. This is certainly a lot better than being Dr. Google and exposing ourselves to whatever junk there is out there.

In this post, I specifically refer to the guidelines issued by the DoH last Friday, January 14th. If you are so inclined, you can find that here. I do provide a summary of these guidelines at the end of this post. In the meantime, here are some of my thoughts which hopefully clarify some of the confusion that I have come across.

Quarantine vs. Isolation

For pretty much all practical purposes, they mean pretty much the same thing – the act of cutting off physical contact from others to prevent the spread of infection. The health authorities, however, use these terms to mean specific things. “Quarantine” will refer to those who have had close contact with suspected or confirmed cases. “Isolation”, on the other hand, applies to those who are suspected or have actually been confirmed to have the virus.

How long is the Isolation or the Quarantine Period?

There are differences in how long one has to isolate or quarantine. The variables that determine these include whether one has symptoms or is asymptomatic, whether one is fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated or unvaccinated and finally, how severe the symptoms of the infection are – mild, moderate or severe/critical. Again, the details are in the summary file below.

When is Day One (of isolation or quarantine period)?

Again, the date from which your count the start of isolation or quarantine varies. It again depends on the circumstances of the individual. As an example, for someone who tests positive with mild symptoms and is fully vaccinated, Day One of the isolation period is the day after the onset of signs and symptoms. On the other hand, for someone who tests positive, is asymptomatic and is either partially vaccinated or unvaccinated, Day One starts on the day after the sample for testing was collected. For close contacts of suspected or confirmed cases – the quarantine period- the counting begins on the day after the date of last exposure.

Do I need to get re-tested?

So let’s say, you’ve done your isolation or quarantine, what happens next? Do I need to get tested again? It may surprise many that repeat testing is not actually required as long as you have not had a fever in the past 24 hours and any other symptoms have shown improvement. This brings to light the fact that our current guidelines based on our latest knowledge are symptom-based rather than testing-based. What does this mean? This protocol is based on studies that a person who has had covid will no longer be infectious after the prescribed isolation period (along with fever and symptom caveat). The whole point of isolation is to make sure that the infected person is not able to infect others. When that no longer is the case, isolation is no longer necessary even though the virus may still be in your body. This is especially important to know given that studies have shown that the virus itself can remain in our bodies for up to 12 weeks from the date of infection. The point is not that the virus is still with you, it is that you are no longer infectious. Thus, there is really no point in getting an RT PCR test after your isolation period. It may continue to detect the presence of the viral material (i.e. test positive) in your body but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you remain a danger to society.

I hope that this clears up a few misconceptions. If in doubt, talk to your doctor. Having said that, it remains important that we continue to be vigilant by wearing our masks, keeping our distance from others, regularly washing our hands, and GETTING VACCINATED. If you can do it, stay home.

Click below to download summary of the guidelines.

updated-guidelines-on-quarantine-isolation-and-testing-for-covid-19-response-and-case-management-for-the-omicron-variantDownload

the price we continue to pay

The picture on the left are of kids from Brgy. Latag, Nasugbu, Batangas who had to walk 3 hours to get to school. Along the way they had to walk through muddy paths and ford a river. These kids are the sons and daughters of the poorest among us Filipinos. Their parents see education as a path to a better future. Now imagine, if they had the benefit of a road and a bridge to make their daily trek easier. Many of these kids from Brgy. Latag and thousands of others all over the country who find themselves in the same situation eventually drop out of school, perpetuating this cycle of poverty. They never had a chance.

The picture on the right is that of a rare pink diamond recovered in Malacanang in 1986, a part of Imelda’s jewelry collection. It is now worth an estimated $12 million or P604 million. It is but a rounding error in the billions that the Marcoses stole from us. While estimates of how much have been stolen range from $5-30 billion in 1986 prices, what is not in dispute is the $1.2 billion that our government has recovered. That would be worth P145 billion in today’s pesos. Now imagine if all that had been used to build the roads and the bridges that the thousands of kids like those of Brgy. Latag could use to get to school.

How do you put a value of the futures of many of our fellow Filipinos which have been stolen and continue to be stolen because of the greed of one family? How can you just forget and move on when the progeny of those who stole this money from us continue to strut in their shameless arrogance?

The price that has been the consequence of this theft can never be repaid for those whose futures have been stolen from them.

#neverforget #neveragain

pink and your facebook timeline

A friend posted on her FB timeline – “so proud of my facebook newsfeed; it’s full of beautiful people posting pretty, pink things”. Another posted – “You have my VOTE!” on top of a picture of Bong Bong Marcos. Still, another, posted – “I have done my research. In 2022, I will be voting for Isko Moreno/Domagoso for president.”.

From here on in, their FB Timelines will almost exclusively be showing posts that will be supportive of their respective choices. They will look for FB groups supportive of their choices, they will be invited to join FB groups supportive of their choices and they will likely unfriend those who promote other choices. Facebook’s algorithms will pick up on these and will similarly direct content to their Timelines supportive of their choices. What comes out will be a perfectly curated Facebook experience that only mirrors their preferences. Over time, this perfectly curated FB experience generates a stress-free utopia with nary a post with a contrarian view.

There will develop a confident feeling of impending victory fed by content including surveys that show only their choice winning and articles narrating stories of their candidate in the best possible light. Their remaining friends will constantly feed their giddy feeling with similarly supportive likes, hearts, shares of posts on their Timelines.

The day of reckoning comes, the counting begins, the results start trickling in. Of the three friends who posted those comments on their Timelines, only one will experience validation of everything their utopic experience has exposed them to. Or it may be none of them will. Whatever the case may be, the other jilted followers will start to think, “this can’t be”. As the results continue to come in with their preferences on the losing end, the false narrative that they have been fed for the past 7 months will lead to the inevitable “dinaya kami“.

Herd mentality, group-think, survivorship bias, or whatever other cultural or psychological phenomenon contributed to this utopia, have all been previously documented. Ito ang ginagawa sa atin ng social media.

If you are serious about really making your candidate win, you will need to go beyond your comfort zones. You will have to engage and convince those who do not share your choice and convince them to join you. It doesn’t do anything to your candidate if you, as they say, only preach to the choir. They will already vote for your candidate.

No matter what some of these surveys say, each candidate for the Presidency will likely start out with no more than 10% of registered voters who have already decided on whom they will vote for. My guess is that only 30% of total registered voters are committed to those who have filed their candidacies. There remains the 70% that need to be convinced one way or another.

It will likely take at least 35% of the total votes cast to win. Only 80% of registered voters will turn out. That means a total of 50 million votes up for grabs. Your candidate needs at least 17.5 million of those votes to win. Your candidate probably has between 2.5 million to 5 million committed votes as of the moment. So your candidate needs at least 12.5 million to 15 million more votes to win.

We can quibble about the numbers but the point is that your candidate will not win by you cocooning yourself in your self-created utopia. As another friend said – “…more than unfollowing and unfriending people who unfortunately believe that Duterte and his enablers (BBM, Isko, Pacquiao, Lacson) are what this country needs, each of us will need to reach out, discuss, convince, persuade – in other words – campaign”.