Is the new strain of influenza that has hit all corners of the globe in recent weeks a flu pandemic? It is difficult to know because the WHO has yet to offer a definitive answer. However, the WHO’s classification of the A(H1N1) outbreak as a Phase 5 outbreak is wrong.
A Phase 5 alert “is characterized by human-to-human spread of the virus into at least two countries in one WHO region.”
The WHO classifies the world into six regions, namely Africa, the Americas, Europe, the Eastern Mediterranean, Southeast Asia and the Western Pacific.
The highest possible pandemic alert is Phase 6, which “is characterized by community level outbreaks in at least one other country in a different WHO region in addition to the criteria defined in Phase 5,” or, in other words, a “global flu pandemic.”
Japan, which is part of the Western Pacific region, and the UK, part of the European region, experienced serious community-level outbreaks some time ago, with hundreds of people infected.
Strangely enough, even after news of the tranmissions in those two countries started spreading, the WHO did not raise the influenza pandemic alert to Phase 6.
The reason is that last week, countries such as the UK and Japan determined that the latest flu strain was weak, causing only mild symptoms, and that the WHO should therefore not raise the alarm to Phase 6.
The problem lies in the plans that these countries have implemented for pandemics. These plans are designed to prepare for the worst and treat any outbreak as extremely serious to gain immediate control of the situation. In other words, as soon as the WHO announces a Phase 6 influenza pandemic alert, these countries must immediately dispense their stocks of Tamiflu and other drugs to all citizens, close all schools and other public places and immediately develop a vaccine.
If the WHO were to announce a Phase 6 influenza pandemic alert, the economic activity of these countries would suffer. Such an announcement would also interfere with the operations of their medical systems, inconvenience the public and cause widespread panic. This is too high a price to pay for a flu of relatively weak virulence.
It would be a waste of valuable Tamiflu stocks and other anti-flu drugs if they were used for the current epidemic. This could also result in the emergence of drug-resistant flu strains in those countries. Depleting anti-flu stocks for a mild epidemic could be problematic if a more virulent strain were to emerge in autumn or winter.
It is worth asking ourselves whether considerations such as these are behind the WHO’s decision not to announce a Phase 6 influenza pandemic alert.
The WHO has said that the latest outbreak is an “unpredictable flu,” ostensibly to defend itself against ridicule. In addition, the WHO has taken many other actions of questionable value.
For example, the organization stopped insisting on naming the virus “swine flu” and changed its designation to A(H1NI) after being pressured by the world’s largest pork exporters.
To please China, meanwhile, it has listed information on A(H1N1) infections in Taiwan under China.
The WHO is no longer a non-biased health organization that cares for universal values, Rather, it appears to have turned into a political body.
Liou Pei-pai is the former director of the Taiwan Animal Health Research Institute.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
RSS