display
Ute Teichert is the chairwoman of the Federal Association of Doctors in the Public Health Service.
This makes her the highest representative of German medical officers.
WORLD:
The federal government defends tough corona measures with the argument that only an incidence below 50 is still manageable for the health authorities.
However, several cities and districts emphasize that they could very well achieve more.
Who is telling the truth, Ms. Teichert?
Ute Teichert:
Depending on your perspective, both are correct.
There is no fixed unit of measure for excessive demands or control, the 50 mark is not set in stone.
It could have been 40 or 60 or 75.
Some health authorities are now better organized and could actually do more.
However, others might have to struggle even at 35.
display
Most importantly, there is a big difference between tracking in a lockdown and tracking without lockdown.
Currently, newly infected people often only have three or four contacts, in summer 2020 it was sometimes 80 to 100. At the moment, there is therefore less work to be done, even with higher incidences.
If the measures were to be relaxed too early, things would look very different.
The number of cases that can be dealt with cannot be reduced to a general number - even in the same health department.
This is where you will find third-party content
In order to interact with or display content from third parties, we need your consent.
Activate external content
I consent to content from third parties being displayed to me.
This allows personal data to be transmitted to third party providers.
This may require the storage of cookies on your device.
More information can be found here.
WORLD:
Nevertheless, politics is sticking to the 50 and is signaling: We currently have no control.
Is that correct or not?
Teichert: It is
very clear that the conditions in the health authorities cannot stay that way.
Many have increased significantly and are now coping with higher incidences.
But auxiliaries, students and soldiers from the German Armed Forces are often used for tracking.
But they'll be gone again soon.
display
What is needed is a comprehensive and sensible concept for the permanent strengthening of the offices.
They need more staff, better technology and more money.
In addition, it is slowly becoming too stupid for the health authorities to always appear as the whipping boys who still work antediluvian with faxes when they are left alone with their problems at the same time.
WORLD:
You would have had the whole summer to upgrade.
Teichert:
Unfortunately, too little has happened on this front.
Many health departments work with employees who are on loan from other departments.
This is not sustainable in order to keep the infection situation stable over the long term.
It is also difficult to find new medical officers when doctors in hospitals are paid better than doctors in health departments.
The many problems are well known, but the consequences are lacking.
display
WORLD:
Who should have developed a comprehensive concept?
Teichert:
That's the problem: There is no central responsibility.
There is therefore no guilty party to be found.
The federal government cannot force the health authorities to do anything.
The cities and district administrations that refuse to interfere are responsible.
Everyone has their own approach, as you can see when using the contact tracing software Sormas.
The county council has just announced that it does not consider a nationwide change of municipalities to Sormas to be desirable or currently achievable.
Health authorities block themselves against corona software
It is said that it is very important to be able to trace the contacts of people infected with corona.
The authorities have not been able to do that for months - despite the support of the Bundeswehr.
This is due to the high numbers, but also to structural problems.
Source: WORLD / Maximilian Seib
WORLD: But the
federal and state governments had jointly agreed to install this software in all 376 health authorities by the end of February for better data exchange.
Will this decision be boycotted?
Teichert:
The software is an offer; an obligation to install it cannot be imposed.
Sormas is used by almost 40 percent of the offices, and the number is increasing every day.
Many health authorities want to continue using their own software because it works well for their purposes.
But all these many systems cannot communicate with one another.
Sormas can do that.
It would therefore revolutionize the work in the authorities.
WELT: But
there is also criticism: more work, data protection concerns, you cannot even note whether a newly infected person is vaccinated.
Has the software been developed past the needs?
display
Teichert:
No, on the contrary, Sormas is software that is continuously adapted to current needs with the help of a user committee in close cooperation with pilot health authorities.
It was developed by the Helmholtz Society back in 2014 and does a good job of treating 37 infectious diseases, for example in Africa in the fight against monkey pox, Lassa fever and other major outbreaks of epidemic diseases.
It doesn't even cost anything.
But in order to use them, a district or a city must think in terms of pandemics and take the larger framework into account, rather than just its own needs.
Perhaps one or the other entry point is missing, but in the end all offices could exchange their data with each other.
It is also correct, however, that an interface to the reporting system for the Robert Koch Institute was still missing.
The health authorities therefore had to enter the data twice.
That has now changed.
Since February 8th, the first health department has been using Sormas with the interfaces to the existing systems of the Robert Koch Institute in real operation, other health departments can be quickly connected.
WORLD:
Should the Prime Minister's Conference increase the pressure on the municipalities to install the system?
Teichert:
There's nothing to be done with pressure.
Persuasion has to be done, for example by emphasizing the advantages even more clearly and offering help with the installation.
This is where you will find third-party content
In order to interact with or display content from third parties, we need your consent.
Activate external content
I consent to content from third parties being displayed to me.
This allows personal data to be transmitted to third party providers.
This may require the storage of cookies on your device.
More information can be found here.
WORLD:
Back to the infection process: a court in Baden-Württemberg has just overturned the curfew.
Given the falling numbers, is an extension of the lockdown even justifiable?
Teichert:
From a medical point of view, this court decision is fatal.
I can understand anyone who would like to travel, go out or party again.
But we're just bargaining a yo-yo effect with it at the moment.
If we get reckless now, all efforts would be in vain, we would get the next explosion immediately and land in an eternal ping-pong of climbs and decreases.
The infection process slips away from us as soon as the highly contagious new virus variants are spread.
It would be better to extend the lockdown.
An incidence of 50 is far too much.
We'd have to get in a very low range below an incidence of ten or at least 20.
Only then do you have air in the system.
display
WORLD:
Last summer, the incidence was already low, and yet the second wave occurred.
Teichert:
But we also learned a lot.
We could keep the situation stable.
WORLD:
This Wednesday, the Prime Minister will speak to the Chancellor.
What do you expect?
Teichert:
When I follow the discussion about the easing plans individual federal states are pursuing, I am, to be honest, amazed.
I therefore consciously formulate diplomatically: I would like us to find a good framework with sensible solutions.
The protection must be raised in many places.
Of course, vaccination must go ahead.
The processes in the offices must be streamlined.
And the testing options must be expanded.
Other countries are much further ahead.
Schools, for example, are only allowed to reopen in conjunction with a sensible testing strategy.
WORLD:
What about self-tests?
There is no progress with the approval.
Teichert:
Self-tests are a great hope.
We should definitely allow them, but also clearly regulate when and how those who discover a corona infection have to report.