[ad_1]
Positive result for coronavirus, the provincial councilor and former health minister Luca Zeni (Pd) responds with a long note to the controversies and accusations against him for how he behaved in the days waiting for the test result.
Last Monday Zeni tested positive for the swab made on Friday and is in quarantine with her family. The politician is asymptomatic but his doctor advised him to get a swab, in the presence of a little fatigue.
Especially from the League there was criticism for the choice to go to a pizzeria with the family on Sunday and Monday morning – before knowing the diagnostic report – in a television study to participate in a broadcast.
Although Zeni had no formal obligation to isolate himself, as it is only a test of caution, in the absence of symptoms, those who criticize him speak of “superficiality” and “not responsible behavior.
Here is the answer and clarifications that Luca Zeni sent us
«Covid newsletter.
– After having rebuilt the list of my contacts in recent weeks with APSS, it seems that the meetings to be considered “at risk” fortunately there were not many, and especially none with older people. My habit of always wearing a mask and trying to maintain adequate distances both inside and outside, has greatly reduced the risk of contagion;
– my scruple of having contacted the doctor despite not having the typical symptoms of covid, and the decision to get a tampon anyway in a situation in which in other cases it probably would not have been done, allowed to intervene in the network of contacts and monitor the situation, and I am happy about this;
– The provincial council discussed the convenience of meeting in session in presence or in connection, after the news of my positivity.
I confess some perplexity about the ongoing debate. The analysis carried out with the APSS did not reveal any contact that is considered risky with the advisors in recent weeks. At 31 out of 34 I had no opportunities to meet, except by video conference, with group mates, meeting methods and times were not considered at risk. As in any other workplace, these situations should not be assessed based on emotion, but based on validated procedures, according to the APSS. So President Kaswalder’s decision to lead the council was normally corrected., according to security protocols that must be independent of my case, but that must be based on the fact that anyone can be positive.
A general discussion is different, starting from the trend of the epidemic, and therefore contemplating the possibility of using digital tools that allow remote participation in counseling in the future, depending on the evaluation of the context;
– Being politically exposed, unfortunately now there are those who try to make a controversy due to the fact that between the hyssop (Friday) and the denouement (Monday) I was not in total isolation, trying to paint myself as a greaser.
The paradox is that the controversy comes from the party of the politician most criticized at the national level for the lack of respect for the rules on covid, the party that governs the province and decides the rules of conduct (to be executed in this case) and the protocols on the covid.
In retrospect, it is easy to judge, but the evaluation must be done under ex ante, not ex post conditions. If you want to approach the subject from a general perspective, remember that even this phase is subject to a clinical evaluation that considers the whole context.
Not all requests for tampons are the same, there are very different cases: they range from the symptomatic who had contact at risk with a positive, and then is immediately considered a high-risk subject with the obligation of isolation, to those who manufacture cyclic tampons for prevention , and meanwhile you can continue with your life normally.
My case was considered absolutely low risk, no positive contact and no covid symptoms (my problem was that I had run 20 km in 1h22 ‘instead of 1h18’ … in medical books it is not considered a very relevant health problem …), with the sharing of wearing a tampon to avoid doubts and to scruple, to have an activity that implies many possibilities of meeting between people, before proceeding with other routine check-ups for athletes. Another person who is in this situation usually does not rub himself and goes on with his life.
For this reason, beyond not having had signs of isolation, I have not worried more than usual.: He had no symptoms and after the conversation with the doctor he was calm and aware that he had simply been very scrupulous in making a swab that in most cases would not have even been done.
So I tried to continue with the utmost attention to individual behaviors, as I always do. And for this reason, fortunately, the cases of my contacts judged at risk are very limited, both before and after the swab.
However, those who criticize must be consistent at the general level and explain how they do not agree with the APSS protocols established according to the guidelines of the provincial government.
Personally, I agree with the balance found, between the need to maintain people’s lives and control and limit the infection as much as possible. The alternative of automatic isolation while waiting for the smear result (which is negative for 98% of cases) would imply a strong general malaise and would discourage the request for tampons; Among other things, the contacts closest to the swab result are those that can be monitored and least troublesome to manage for the spread of infection. That is why there are no automatisms on isolations, but rather concrete evaluations, and I agree with the approach of the provincial government, criticized by some exponents of the Northern League.
– For example, Councilor Dalzocchio who was with me on a television broadcast, sitting several meters away, from Apss’s point of view, is not considered my contact. His decision not to participate in the provincial council yesterday (having participated in other meetings anyway) as a “precaution” and the choice to obtain a swab, contrasts with all the indications provided. If for emotionality and greater personal tranquility you want to make a tampon in private, everyone can do whatever they want.
But if you communicate it publicly to try to exploit the thing politically, you have to be careful not to send the message that whoever has moved away from the provincial provisions of a positive is at risk of contagion and must adopt restrictive measures.
Even more incorrect is to convey the message that taking a swab a day or two after a contact deemed at risk solves the problem., because even in the case of negativity, the disease could arise later: not in vain the expected quarantine is usually 14 days. And if that swab were positive (which is very possible, if everyone touched each other, the percentage of positives would probably be much higher than we imagine), it is technically ruled out that it has been infected by such a recent contact over time .
Therefore, one of two: either the APSS protocols are correct according to the indications of the Provincial Council and Councilor Dalzocchio, having been at the distances provided by a positive does not put you at risk (for that specific meeting, no in general: it is in any case, a person exposed to many meetings) and you can continue as usual, or on the contrary you are right, you are at risk, and then the tampon must do it at the end of the 14 days of isolation, and you must ask to the president of the Provincial Council to review the provisions. safety requirements for the workplace and which have been followed by the television station in question.
Therefore, I conclude with a general invitation to get into the background of the issues, because from there it is proceeding as a result of a great in-depth technical analysis and professionalism. In this regard, I thank the excellent APSS prevention department that is doing a great job in this period.
A transversal commitment of politics, instead of looking for pretexts to make controversies, could be to ask for greater support in terms of resources, especially human, to allow maximum capillarity and opportunity in the filling work (or analysis with rapid methods that hopefully will soon be widely used), to assess and contact people at risk. ‘
[ad_2]
