The Development of COVID-19 Apps

COVID-19 apps are mobile software applications that utilise digital contact tracking and were
developed in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It has made it easier for governments and their
citizens to identify and monitor anyone who may have come into close contact with an infected
person. It is presently synonymous with digital contact tracing because to the development of
COVID-19 applications; however, if new illnesses arise, digital contact tracing will be differentiated
independently. As a result, the aim of this article is to examine the moral and ethical implications of
such applications, as well as their immediate effect in dealing with the issue. Its effect on business,
politics, family, and health has all benefited from digital contact tracking on a global and micro level.

To begin with, contact tracing is critical in preventing an infectious illness from spreading. The
Coronavirus is wreaking havoc on the global economy; public and private institutions are rethinking
how they operate, and schools and businesses are attempting to keep employees safe by using
online chat services for video conferencing, all in an effort to reduce unnecessary contact and
prevent the disease from spreading. Unfortunately, since many professions need employees to work
beside one another, not everyone can maintain physical separation. Health professionals, such as
physicians and nurses, who are in direct touch with patients on a daily basis are a good illustration of
this. They must be in order to treat patients, but the recent surge in infected cases, along with
overused equipment such as masks, has placed health professionals in danger. People's widespread
use of digital contact tracing aids in informing individuals and authorities when they have come into
touch with an infected person. Knowing who is sick helps determine where the illness has most likely
spread, and then steps may be taken to isolate and treat infected people, according to one-way
digital contact tracking. To summarise, it protects individuals from unintentionally transmitting it to
those who are most vulnerable.

Traditional contact tracing has several limitations.

Traditional and digital contact tracing are the two most common forms of contact tracing.
Traditional contact tracing involves interviewing sick individuals and then identifying others with
whom they may have come into contact in order to monitor and treat the illness. The method
involves identifying sick people, questioning them about their locations and who they've
encountered, and then repeating the process by testing whether the contacted individual is infected.
Because the capacity to transmit important information is delayed by physical constraints, this
procedure is prone to mistake. It's also worth noting that false positives and delays in public
notification may mean the difference between a small and controlled epidemic and an exponentially
huge outbreak.

Traditional contact tracing worked well in tracking Ebola infections, however COVID-19 is thought to
have a shorter serial interval, ranging from 4 to 5 days. Because the period between exposure and
apparent symptoms differs from prior illnesses, traditional contact tracing is less efficient in
monitoring and managing the Coronavirus. Due to a lack of knowledge about the Coronavirus and
the disease's propensity to spread rapidly, nations have changed their response to the issue from
conventional to digital contact tracking.

Apps for COVID-19 have certain limitations.

The reliance on the public to use COVID-19 applications, all to better track the transmission of
illnesses, is a constraint of digital contact tracing. Tracing will be more accurate if more users use
standardised COVID-19 applications since more data can be gathered and evaluated. However, it is
estimated that a 60% population acceptance rate is required to be successful. Governments have
mandated the use of COVID-19 applications and monitoring as a result of the estimated adoption
rate. Mandatory participation is very successful in monitoring and preventing the spread of the
Coronavirus and related illnesses since it demands involvement from the whole community.
Governments have used surveillance by utilising security video to monitor a person's movements
and locations in conjunction with COVID-19 applications. This kind of mandatory involvement has
proven divisive for a variety of reasons. The general public is concerned about government and
corporate data collection of personal information. Citizens' adoption has stalled as a result of this.

The other option is voluntary involvement, which uses location-based tracking to track the disease's
progress. Users may opt-in to participate, and location-based tracing can be done via Bluetooth,
barcoding, Wi-Fi signalling, or GPS. While there are advantages to location-based training, each has
its own set of issues and concerns. Bluetooth, for example, has accuracy problems since estimated
distances between two individuals vary due to object interference. The hardware utilised in the
COVID-19 applications is also a source of worry for their efficiency. Because smartphones cease
getting system upgrades after a few years, it is suggested that phones older than 3-5 years be
replaced to be deemed trustworthy. This has raised worries about e-waste since outdated devices
must be updated to minimise the risk of errors such as false positives. People in affected regions
who are unable to get the most up-to-date cellphones are unable to use digital contact tracing.

Concerns with COVID-19 applications

Concerns about privacy and surveillance have been raised as a result of digital contact tracing, as
governments, corporations, and app administrators can use the situation to justify their actions and
avoid ethical concerns about monetizing personal information or categorising citizens for political
gain. As a result, well-known businesses like Google and Apple devised a strategy called Exposure
Notification (ENF) that is exclusively focused on the Coronavirus. Various organisations and
organisations concerned about privacy and security concerns have examined the proposal and given
it positive feedback. A counter-argument to depending on voluntary involvement is that in situations
where governments have not enforced public engagement, digital tracing adoption rates in
Singapore are presently below 30%. Furthermore, digital tracing applications are believed to be
underutilised, which has a significant influence on the COVID-19 apps' efficacy.

Last but not least, there is no scientific proof that this kind of contact tracking can halt transmission.
Despite the fact that nations have funded organisations and initiatives to combat illnesses, the
coronavirus has had a worldwide economic effect unlike any previous pandemic. Many disease
control centres lacked financing, and governments lacked means to address the problems caused by
the coronavirus. Until recently, there was no demand for COVID-19 applications, but now
governments and businesses are beginning to investigate their efficacy. However, it will take years of
study and testing before the findings are universally accepted. People and governments are
speculating that COVID-19 applications are effective in controlling the Coronavirus as a result of the
scenario.

Conclusion

The advantages and disadvantages of COVID-19 applications are obvious, and at a time when
knowledge and resources are few, nations should explore using digital contact tracking to combat
the Coronavirus. COVID-19 applications and digital contact tracking have enabled mankind to
reconsider how illnesses should and can be addressed. COVID-19 applications have sparked serious
debates about how to continue with this kind of technology, and digital contact tracking raises
privacy concerns. Covid-19 applications will assist control and halt the transmission of the
coronavirus and future infectious illnesses if further study, testing, and proper usage of digital
contact tracking is done.