Freedom, GEABSOLUTE POWERS CORRUPT ABSOLUTELY, General Election (GE15), Malaysia, Politics, polling Nov 19: Destroy Umno for the betterment of Malaysia, race, religion, Solidality, support Aliran for Justice
WHEN US President Joe Biden asked the United States Intelligence Community (IC) to determine the origin of Covid-19, its conclusion was remarkably understated but nonetheless shocking. In a one-page summary, the IC made clear that it could not rule out the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes Covid-19) emerged from a laboratory.
But even more shocking for Americans and the world is an additional point on which the IC remained mum: If the virus did indeed result from laboratory research and experimentation, it was almost certainly created with US biotechnology and know-how that had been made available to researchers in China.
To learn the complete truth about the origins of Covid-19, we need a full, independent investigation not only into the outbreak in Wuhan, China, but also into the relevant US scientific research, international outreach, and technology licensing in the lead-up to the pandemic.
We recently called for such an investigation in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Some might dismiss our reasons for doing so as a “conspiracy theory.” But let us be crystal clear: If the virus did emerge from a laboratory, it almost surely did so accidentally in the normal course of research, possibly going undetected via asymptomatic infection.
It is of course also still possible that the virus had a natural origin. The bottom line is that nobody knows. That is why it is so important to investigate all the relevant information contained in databases available in the US.
Missed opportunities
Since the start of the pandemic in early 2020, the US government has pointed an accusatory finger at China. But while it is true that the first observed Covid-19 cases were in Wuhan, the full story of the outbreak could involve America’s role in researching coronaviruses and in sharing its biotechnology with others around the world, including China.
US scientists who work with SARS-like coronaviruses regularly create and test dangerous novel variants with the aim of developing drugs and vaccines against them. Such “gain-of-function” research has been conducted for decades, but it has always been controversial, owing to concerns that it could result in an accidental outbreak, or that the techniques and technologies for creating new viruses could end up in the wrong hands. It is reasonable to ask whether SARS-CoV-2 owes its remarkable infectivity to this broader research effort.
Unfortunately, US authorities have sought to suppress this very question. Early in the epidemic, a small group of virologists queried by the US National Institutes of Health told the NIH leadership that SARS-CoV-2 might have arisen from laboratory research, noting that the virus has unusual features that virologists in the US have been using in experiments for years – often with support from the NIH.
How do we know what NIH officials were told, and when? Because we now have publicly available information released by the NIH in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. We know that on Feb 1, 2020, the NIH held a conference call with a group of top virologists to discuss the possible origin of the virus. On that call, several of the researchers pointed out that laboratory manipulation of the virus was not only possible, but according to some, even likely. At that point, the NIH should have called for an urgent independent investigation. Instead, the NIH has sought to dismiss and discredit this line of inquiry.Heads in the sand
Within days of the Feb 1 call, a group of virologists, including some who were on it, prepared the first draft of a paper on the “Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2.” The final draft was published a month later, in March 2020. Despite the initial observations on Feb 1 that the virus showed signs of possible laboratory manipulation, the March paper concluded that there was overwhelming evidence that it had emerged from nature.
The authors claimed that the virus could not possibly have come from a laboratory because “the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone.” Yet the single footnote (number 20) backing up that key claim refers to a paper from 2014, which means that the authors’ supposedly “irrefutable evidence” was at least five years out of date.
Owing to their refusal to support an independent investigation of the lab-leak hypothesis, the NIH and other US federal government agencies have been subjected to a wave of FOIA requests from a range of organisations, including US Right to Know and The Intercept. These FOIA disclosures, as well as internet searches and “whistleblower” leaks, have revealed some startling information.
Consider, for example, a March 2018 grant proposal submitted to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) by EcoHealth Alliance (EHA) and researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and the University of North Carolina (UNC). On page 11, the applicants explain in detail how they intend to alter the genetic code of bat coronaviruses to insert precisely the feature that is the most unusual part of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Although DARPA did not approve this grant, the work may have proceeded anyway. We just don’t know. But, thanks to another FOIA request, we do know that this group carried out similar gain-of-function experiments on another coronavirus, the one that causes Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS).
In yet other cases, FOIA disclosures have been heavily redacted, including a remarkable effort to obscure 290 pages of documents going back to February 2020, including the Strategic Plan for Covid-19 Research drafted that April by the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Such extensive redactions deeply undermine public trust in science, and have only served to invite additional urgent questions from researchers and independent investigators.
In a one-page summary, the IC made clear that it could not rule out the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes Covid-19) emerged from a laboratory. – AFP
The facts of the case
Here are ten things that we do know.
First, the SARS-CoV-2 genome is distinguished by a particular 12-nucleotide sequence (the genetic code) that serves to increase its infectivity. The specific amino acid sequence directed by this insertion has been much discussed and is known as a furin cleavage site (FCS).
Second, the FCS has been a target of cutting-edge research since 2006, following the original SARS outbreak of 2003-04. Scientists have long understood that the FCS holds the key to these viruses’ infectivity and pathophysiology.
Third, SARS-CoV-2 is the only virus in the family of SARS-like viruses (sarbecoviruses) known to have an FCS. Interestingly, the specific form of the FCS that is present in SARS-CoV-2 (eight amino acids encoded by 24 nucleotides) is shared with a human sodium channel that has been studied in US labs.
Fourth, the FCS was already so well known as a driver of transmissibility and virulence that a group of US scientists submitted a proposal to the US government in 2018 to study the effect of inserting an FCS into SARS-like viruses found in bats. Although the dangers of this kind of work have been highlighted for some time, these bat viruses were somehow considered to be in a lower-risk category. This exempted them from NIH gain-of-function guidelines, thereby enabling NIH-funded experiments to be carried out at the inadequate BSL-2 safety level.
Fifth, the NIH was a strong supporter of such gain-of-function research, much of which was performed using US-developed biotechnology and executed within an NIH-funded three-way partnership between the EHA, the WIV, and UNC.
Sixth, in 2018, a leading US scientist pursuing this research argued that laboratory manipulation was vital for drug and vaccine discovery, but that increased regulation could stymie progress. Many within the virology community continue to resist sensible calls for enhanced regulation of the most high-risk virus manipulation, including the establishment of a national regulatory body independent of the NIH.
Seventh, the virus was very likely circulating a lot earlier than the standard narrative that dates awareness of the outbreak to late December 2019. We still do not know when parts of the US government became aware of the outbreak, but some scientists were aware of the outbreak as of mid-December.
Eighth, the NIH knew as early as Feb 1, 2020, that the virus could have emerged as a consequence of NIH-funded laboratory research, but it did not disclose that fundamental fact to the public or to the US Congress.
Ninth, extensive sampling by Chinese authorities of animals in Wuhan wet markets and in the wild has found not a single wild animal harboring the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Despite this, there is no indication that the NIH has requested the laboratory records of US agencies, academic centers, and biotech companies involved in researching and manipulating SARS-like coronaviruses.
Tenth, the IC has not explained why at least some of the US intelligence agencies do in fact believe that a laboratory release was either the most likely or at least a possible origin of the virus.
Time for transparency
Given the questions that remain unanswered, we are calling on the US government to conduct a bipartisan investigation. We may never understand the origin of SARS-CoV-2 without opening the books of the relevant federal agencies (including the NIH and the Department of Defense), the laboratories they support, academic institutions that store and archive viral sequence data, and biotechnology companies.
A key objective of the investigation would be to shed light on a basic question: Did US researchers undertake research or help their Chinese counterparts to undertake research to insert an FCS into a SARS-like virus, thereby playing a possible role in the creation of novel pathogens like the one that led to the current pandemic?
Investigations into Covid-19’s origins should no longer be secretive ventures led by the IC. The process must be transparent, with all relevant information being released publicly for use by independent scientific researchers. It seems clear to us that there has been a concerted effort to suppress information regarding the earliest events in the outbreak, and to hinder the search for additional evidence that is clearly available within the US. We suggest that a panel of independent researchers in relevant disciplines be created and granted access to all pertinent data in order to advise the US Congress and the public.
There is a good chance that we can learn more about the origins of this virus without waiting on China or any other country, simply by looking in the US. We believe such an inquiry is long overdue. – Project Syndicate
Neil L. Harrison is a professor at Columbia University. Jeffrey D. Sachs, university professor at Columbia University, is director of the Center for Sustainable Development at Columbia University and president of the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network. This article was first published on Project Syndicate.
Frequent outbreaks triggered by imported frozen products; reports suggesting traces of coronavirus found elsewhere earlier than Wuhan… so is COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan also result of imported cold-chain products? Check GT special investigative report…
Italian newspaper Corriere Della Sera reported in November that a new coronavirus was circulating in Italy in September 2019, a study by the National Cancer Institute (INT) of the Italian city of Milan shows, indicating that the virus may have existed in Italy months before it was first detected in China.
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6 percent of 959 blood samples from healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.
Peter Forster, a geneticist from Cambridge, also told the Global Times that he is not surprised that there might be cases earlier than China.
Foster suggests it is useful to think of three stages in the origins of the coronavirus: when and where did it cross the species barrier from bats to humans and when and where did it start spreading successfully among humans. “My dating suggests sometime between September and December 2019,” said the virologist, proposing finally to look at when the globally dominant infectious coronavirus subtype arose.
“Everyone agrees it was prominent in Northern Italy in February 2020. Some scientists said it came to Italy from China, but I am not so sure,” he said.
Evidence of both epidemiology and virology are needed to find out where the virus comes from, said the Beijing-based anonymous expert. If the pandemic originated from a certain place, there should be signs of an early outbreak. It is also possible that the virus already existed, but not seriously enough to cause an outbreak, he said, noting that there is only a small probability of the latter scenario, and no solid evidence to support it.
From a virology perspective, a full gene sequence of cases from that place should be obtained for observation and for determining when the virus was transmitted to this place via time and the virus’ variation point, said the expert.
“If we have doubts that the virus was originated from places other than Wuhan, we can compare its sequencing with the virus that was found in Wuhan. [We should] compare their homology and variability, to see if the virus found in other places is in its early stage, or it is evolved,” he said.
There are reports from several countries that early blood samples tested positive for the virus, but they can provide no evidence of the nucleic sequence, so the possibility of a false negative cannot be ruled out, said the anonymous expert.
He believes that if antibodies can be found in the blood serum, then the virus can also be found there. Even if the virus is not infectious anymore, it is easily detected, as its nucleic acid is protected by the coat of the virus and it is very stable and sensitive.
The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, Central China's Hubei Province on November 22. Photo: Fan Lingzhi/GT
International cooperation urged
Although those virologists have pictured a clear route map to trace the origin of the virus, the real path to finding the origin is laden with difficulties.
The anonymous expert said that in terms of tracing the virus origin, the momentum for international scientists to cooperate has retrogressed compared with the pre-COVID-19 period.
“Scientists are reluctant to become involved in politics, they are eyeing international cooperation. Yet researchers from all over the world are acting with caution, avoiding troubles, and refusing casual communication. I don’t think it’s an ideal atmosphere for cooperation.”
This has drawn attention from international bodies. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus urged countries on November 30 not to politicize the hunt for the origins of the new coronavirus, saying that would only create barriers to learning the truth.
When talking to Tedros in September, director of China's National Health Commission Ma Xiaowei vowed to enhance cooperation with the WHO on virus prevention, origin tracing and vaccine development. China is pushing forward the work on the virus origin tracing, and is willing to strengthen cooperation and communication with the WHO, Ma said.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said on November 24 that while tracing the origin domestically, China has been earnestly implementing WHA resolutions.
"We are the first to invite WHO experts in for origin-tracing cooperation." Zhao said, adding that "We hope all relevant countries will adopt a positive attitude and cooperate with WHO like China does, making contributions to global origin-tracing and anti-epidemic cooperation."
“International communication on the virus origin should be frequent and open for all. But some countries weighed in and complicated the issue,” said Yang, who noted that the world has achieved great progress in fighting COVID-19 in the past year, including treatment of the disease and vaccine R&D.
Tracing the virus origin should not be a battle against each other; instead, an information, data sharing mechanism is helpful to bring the virus under control, Yang said.
FORCED TO SHUT DOWN WHEN VIRUSES LEAKED AUGUST 2019
US SOLDIERS WERE INFECTED
300 HUNDRED CAME TO WUHAN ON PRETENSE OF TAKING PART IN THE WORLD MILITARY COMPETITION - WON NOT ONE MEDAL
SPREAD OUT IN WUHAN WITH SOME VISITING THE WET MARKETS
US CONSULATE IN WUHAN FULLY EVACUATED WITH BIOWEAPON DRUMS LEFT IN GROUNDS
https://youtu.be/WqYytIqk-WQ
WEEKS LATER FIRST VICTIM OF CORONAVIRUS APPEARED IN WUHAN
US FOUND TO HAVE 5 STRAINS, WUHAN HAS ONE
PROVING THE UNITED STATES IS THE ORIGIN OF THE CORONAVIRUS
August
6, 2019, the US's main biological warfare lab at Fort Detrick was
issued a "ceast and desist" order because of violation of safety
standards and protocol, and leaks.
August
- September 2019, "statewide outbreak" of a mysterious respiratory
emerged in the US, causing severe respiratory diseases in a few hundred
people. This was blamed on vaping although people had been vaping for
more than a decade without such outbreaks. Officials were unable to find
any relation to a specific vaping device and addictive.
August
2019 - Jan 2020, the US CDC reported that the US is gearing up for one
of the worst flu seasons ever, with 12000 deaths. On 12 March 2020, the
CDC director admitted that some COVID-19 deaths were misdiagnosed as the
flu because COVID-19 were found when they did posthumous tests.
October
18 - 27, 2019, the 2019 Military World Games was held in Wuhan. The US
sent a contingent of 350 athletes. They did not win any medals. The
athletes toured Wuhan.
November
2019, the Chinese press reported that five athletes who had suffered
from infectious disease had been discharged from hospital.
November
2019, Wuhan locals were detected with COVID-19, with a spike of such
terms in local social media. This coincided with the post-incubation
period after the Military World Games.
December
1, 2019, the first confirmed case of COVID-19 was detected in Wuhan.
Subsequently more than 80000 people will be infected. Of the first 41
cases, 34% were not related to the wildlife market.
Daniel
Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University,
claimed that because there is an incubation time between infection and
symptoms surfacing, and the presence of infected people with no links to
wildlife market, the virus could not have originated from the wildlife
market. Kristian Andersen, an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps
Research Institute, agreed with the assessment.
Genotype
assay of COVID-19 revealed 5 variants/strains (group ABCDE) of the
virus. Most regions in the world have 1-2 COVID-19 variants including
Hubei (mainly group C), and UK (Group .
US is the only country with all 5 variants (Group ABCDE). In Virology
101, the region with the most variants is the origin of the disease.
25
Jan, 2020, Japanese couple went for a 10 days vacation in Hawaii. On
the second week they fell ill. On return to Japan they were tested and
confirmed to have COVID-19.
Italy
lab confirmed that the strain of COVID-19 is different from the one
circulating in China, and that the circulation of the virus is not so
recent, and had been spreading undetected for weeks.
China's
coronavirus expert Dr Zhong Nanshan, the discoverer of SARS, said that
although COVID-19 was detected in China, it doesn't necessary mean that
it originated from China.
As
of March 12, 2020, the US had only tested 10000 people, and COVID-19
was confirmed in 1600 of them. As a comparison South Korea tests 10000
people a day, but the disease rate trajectory is the same as the US.
This suggests that there is a great number of infected people in the US,
just that they were not tested.
As readers will recall from the earlier article (above), Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists and pharmacologists have determined that the new coronavirus almost certainly originated in the US since that country is the only one known to have all five types – from which all others must have descended. Wuhan in China has only one of those types, rendering it in analogy as a kind of “branch” which cannot exist by itself but must have grown from a “tree”.
The Taiwanese physician noted that in August of 2019 the US had a flurry of lung pneumonias or similar, which the Americans blamed on ‘vaping’ from e-cigarettes, but which, according to the scientist, the symptoms and conditions could not be explained by e-cigarettes. He said he wrote to the US officials telling them he suspected those deaths were likely due to the coronavirus. He claims his warnings were ignored.
Immediately prior to that, the CDC totally shut down the US Military’s main bio-lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland, due to an absence of safeguards against pathogen leakages, issuing a complete “cease and desist” order to the military. It was immediately after this event that the ‘e-cigarette’ epidemic arose.
Screenshot from The New York Times August 08, 2019
We also had the Japanese citizens infected in September of 2019, in Hawaii, people who had never been to China, these infections occurring on US soil long before the outbreak in Wuhan but only shortly after the locking down of Fort Detrick.
Then, on Chinese social media, another article appeared, aware of the above but presenting further details. It stated in part that five “foreign” athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games (October 18-27, 2019) were hospitalised in Wuhan for an undetermined infection.
The article explains more clearly that the Wuhan version of the virus could have come only from the US because it is what they call a “branch” which could not have been created first because it would have no ‘seed’. It would have to have been a new variety spun off the original ‘trunk’, and that trunk exists only in the US. (1)
There has been much public speculation that the coronavirus had been deliberately transmitted to China but, according to the Chinese article, a less sinister alternative is possible.
If some members of the US team at the World Military Games (18-27 October) had become infected by the virus from an accidental outbreak at Fort Detrick it is possible that, with a long initial incubation period, their symptoms might have been minor, and those individuals could easily have ‘toured’ the city of Wuhan during their stay, infecting potentially thousands of local residents in various locations, many of whom would later travel to the seafood market from which the virus would spread like wildfire (as it did).
That would account also for the practical impossibility of locating the legendary “patient zero” – which in this case has never been found since there would have been many of them.
Next, Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease expert at Georgetown University in Washington, said in an article in Science magazine that the first human infection has been confirmed as occurring in November 2019, (not in Wuhan), suggesting the virus originated elsewhere and then spread to the seafood markets. “One group put the origin of the outbreak as early as 18 September 2019.” (2) (3)
China’s New Coronavirus: An Examination of the FactsWuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally.
Description of earliest cases suggests outbreak began elsewhere.
The article states:
“As confirmed cases of a novel virus surge around the world with worrisome speed, all eyes have so far focused on a seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the outbreak. But a description of the first clinical cases published in The Lancet on Friday challenges that hypothesis.” (4) (5)
The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. “No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases”, they state. Their data also show that, in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace. “That’s a big number, 13, with no link”, says Daniel Lucey . . . (6)
Earlier reports from Chinese health authorities and the World Health Organization had said the first patient had onset of symptoms on 8 December 2019 – and those reports simply said “most” cases had links to the seafood market, which was closed on 1 January. (7)
“Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019 – if not earlier – because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan – and perhaps elsewhere – before the cluster of cases from the city’s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December. “The virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplace”, Lucey asserts.
“China must have realized the epidemic did not originate in that Wuhan Huanan seafood market”, Lucey told Science Insider. (8)
Kristian Andersen is an evolutionary biologist at the Scripps Research Institute who has analyzed sequences of 2019-nCoV to try to clarify its origin. He said the scenario was “entirely plausible” of infected persons bringing the virus into the seafood market from somewhere outside. According to the Science article,
“Andersen posted his analysis of 27 available genomes of 2019-nCoV on 25 January on a virology research website. It suggests they had a “most recent common ancestor” – meaning a common source – as early as 1 October 2019.” (9)
It was interesting that Lucey also noted that MERS was originally believed to have come from a patient in Saudi Arabia in June of 2012, but later and more thorough studies traced it back to an earlier hospital outbreak of unexplained pneumonia in Jordan in April of that year. Lucey said that from stored samples from people who died in Jordan, medical authorities confirmed they had been infected with the MERS virus. (10)
This would provide impetus for caution among the public in accepting the “official standard narrative” that the Western media are always so eager to provide – as they did with SARS, MERS, and ZIKA, all of which ‘official narratives’ were later proven to have been entirely wrong.
In this case, the Western media flooded their pages for months about the COVID-19 virus originating in the Wuhan seafood market, caused by people eating bats and wild animals. All of this has been proven wrong.
Not only did the virus not originate at the seafood market, it did not originate in Wuhan at all, and it has now been proven that it did not originate in China but was brought to China from another country. Part of the proof of this assertion is that the genome varieties of the virus in Iran and Italy have been sequenced and declared to have no part of the variety that infected China and must, by definition, have originated elsewhere.
It would seem the only possibility for origination is the US because only that country has the “tree trunk” of all the varieties. And it may therefore be true that the original source of the COVID-19 virus was the US military bio-warfare lab at Fort Detrick. This would not be a surprise, given that the CDC completely shut down Fort Detrick, but also because, as I related in an earlier article, between 2005 and 2012 the US had experienced 1,059 events where pathogens had been either stolen or escaped from American bio-labs during the prior ten years – an average of one every three days.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Larry Romanoff is a retired management consultant and businessman. He has held senior executive positions in international consulting firms, and owned an international import-export business. He has been a visiting professor at Shanghai’s Fudan University, presenting case studies in international affairs to senior EMBA classes. Mr. Romanoff lives in Shanghai and is currently writing a series of ten books generally related to China and the West. He can be contacted at: 2186604556@qq.com. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.
By Larry RomanoffGlobal Research, March 11, 2020Region: USATheme: Intelligence, Science and Medicineprint 1291 125 23 1598
It would be useful to read this prior article for background:
China’s Coronavirus: A Shocking Update. Did The Virus Originate in the US?
By Larry Romanoff, March 04, 2020
The World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday said that the novel coronavirus outbreak has become a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).
However, the UN health body stressed that it does not recommend limiting trade and travel.
It also once again spoke highly of China's prevention and containment measures.
A WHO declaration of an international public health emergency is rare, with only five going into effect in the past decade. These include situations concerning the 2009 H1 virus that caused an influenza pandemic, West Africa's Ebola outbreak, polio in 2014, the Zika virus in 2016 and the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
No need to overreact on coronavirus PHEIC label: analysts
The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus a global public health emergency (PHEIC), emphasizing that it was not a vote of no confidence in China. Chinese analysts said there is no need to overreact to the declaration while fighting the virus, although it could add extra pressure to the world's second-largest economy.
Over the past few weeks, we have witnessed the emergence of a previously unknown pathogen, which has escalated into an outbreak, and which has been met by an unprecedented response, said WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus at a press conference in Geneva, Switzerland on Thursday.
At least 98 novel coronavirus cases have been reported in 18 countries, including eight human-to-human transmissions in Germany, Japan, Vietnam, and the US. The majority of the cases outside of China involved people who had traveled to Wuhan, or were in contact with someone who had visited the city, said Ghebreyesus.
After considering multiple factors, WHO designated the coronavirus as a PHEIC. However, WHO continues to have confidence in China's ability to control the outbreak.
Chinese analysts said it was not necessary to overreact or interpret the news as a hostile attitude toward China from the global community. The shared priority is to prevent the deadly virus from spreading across the globe.
"Indeed, it may give extra pressure to China, with both economic and political implications," Shen Yi, director at the Research Center for Cyberspace Governance of Fudan University, told the Global Times.
"But it's up to how China continues fighting the epidemic in order to help its economy recovered," Yi said, noting that the WHO decision has little influence on how other countries handle economic ties with China amid the pneumonia outbreak.
Serious events that endanger international health are considered to be PHEIC as it constitutes a risk to other countries through the spread of the disease, which is also "serious, unusual, or unexpected," and carries implications for public health beyond the affected country's borders or requires immediate international action, according to WHO.
A PHEIC declaration is rare, as only five have been made in the past decade including the H1N1 virus that caused an influenza pandemic in 2009, West Africa's Ebola, polio in 2014, the Zika virus in 2016, and the ongoing Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo that started in 2019.
Concerns have emerged over whether other countries would close their borders or impose trade and travel restrictions, which has happened in the past when a PHEIC is declared.
There is no reason for measures that unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade, WHO said, calling for all countries to implement decisions that are evidence-based and consistent after it declares novel coronavirus a global public health emergency.
According to the International Health Regulations (IHR), if the WHO declares a PHEIC, the director-general shall issue temporary recommendations including health measures regarding people, baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods, and postal parcels to prevent or reduce the spread of the disease and avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic.
However, temporary recommendations are non-binding advisories issued by WHO and are on a time-limited, risk-specific basis, according to IHR.
When WHO declared the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo as a PHEIC, the organization emphasized it was essential to avoid the punitive economic consequences of travel and trade restrictions on affected communities, in a statement published on its website in July 2019.
Under the IHR, countries implementing additional health measures going beyond what WHO recommends will be obliged to send public health rationale and justification within 48 hours of implementation for WHO to review, said WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic to the Global Times on Thursday.
WHO is obliged to share the information about measures and the justification received with other countries involved, Jasarevic said, noting that countries are asked to provide public health justification for any travel or trade measures that are not scientifically based, such as the refusal of entry based on suspect cases or unaffected persons to affected areas.
Yang Gonghuan, former director of tobacco control at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, told the Global Times that WHO would depend on the situation of the epidemic rather than targeting a specific place or for political purposes.
In response to concerns that a PHEIC would "hold China's breath," Yang said such thinking is "incorrect and unreasonable."
"WHO's decision and measures are based on the perspective of global disease prevention," Yang said.
However, the PHEIC label could frighten contracting countries to the point that they could disobey WHO recommendations and impose more stringent limits on travel and trade with the country where the virus originated, which would create significant economic losses.
During the H1N1 pandemic in 2009, WHO stressed the virus could not spread through pork products and yet over 40 countries banned pork imports from H1N1-affected nations, according to media reports.
Contracting states have agreed to follow WHO guidelines, and they should act within the forum of the organization, Yang noted.
Li called for joint research efforts of multidisciplinary
experts to expedite the development of easy testing kits, vaccines and
effective drugs to fight the novel coronavirus.
Researchers from China's prestigious Tsinghua University
are stepping up vaccine development targeting the novel coronavirus,
which has already caused 7,711 confirmed cases of pneumonia in China as
of Thursday.
Chinese government decides to send charter flights to
bring overseas Chinese citizens from Hubei Province, especially Wuhan
City, directly back to Wuhan as soon as possible: MFA
The purchasing managers' index (PMI) for China's
non-manufacturing sector came in at 54.1 in January, up from 53.5 in
December, the National Bureau of Statistics said Friday.
China is confident in and capable of effectively
containing the novel coronavirus epidemic, and eventually defeating it,
the National Health Commission said in a statement Friday.
The World Health Organization (WHO) on Thursday said that
the novel coronavirus outbreak has become a Public Health Emergency of
International Concern (PHEIC).
The health commission head for Huanggang, the second most
affected coronavirus city in Hubei Province, the epicenter for the
virus, was released Thursday due to a lack of knowledge on the city's
disease treatment capabilities and resources.
With measures taken to contain the spread of the novel
coronavirus, an inflection point is likely to appear within the next one
or two incubation periods, according to one expert on Thursday.
China appreciates the efforts of other countries in
helping to combat the novel coronavirus and is confident it will win the
battle, a spokesperson from the National Health Commission (NHC) said
at a press conference on Thursday.
Chinese President Xi Jinping said Tuesday that China has
full confidence and capability to win the battle against the outbreak of
pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
The Chinese people have just experienced an unforgettable
Spring Festival as the whole country has been forced to endure the
spread of the novel coronavirus, which has resulted in more than 170
deaths and 8,152 confirmed cases in all of the Chinese mainland's 31
provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities.
WHO chief said that WHO appreciates the seriousness with
which China is taking the coronavirus outbreak, especially the
commitment from top leadership, and the transparency they have
demonstrated, including sharing data and genetic sequence of the virus
More than 46,000 people have signed a petition demanding
the Australian media to apologize publicly for racism against the
Chinese community after two media outlets carried headlines and
highlighted characters on their front pages which labeled the novel
coronavirus-related pneumonia as a "Chinese virus" and hyped sentiments
that would require Chinese children to stay at home.
Experts on Wednesday slammed the Tibetan bill that was
passed by the US House on Tuesday, which proposes sanctions on Chinese
officials involved in the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, calling the
bill a gross interference in China's internal affairs under the disguise
of religious freedom which will not have any substantial influence on
China.
GENEVA (Xinhua): The director-general of the World Health Organization (WHO) said on Wednesday (Jan 29) that China deserves the international community's gratitude and respect for having taken very serious measures to contain the novel coronavirus outbreak and prevent exporting cases overseas.
Addressing journalists at a press conference in Geneva, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus thanked the Chinese government for the extraordinary steps it has taken to prevent the spread of the new coronavirus.
Tedros reiterated that almost 99 per cent of cases and all deaths have been within China, with only 68 confirmed cases and no deaths in 15 countries and regions outside China.
"For that, China deserves our gratitude and respect... China is implementing very serious measures and we cannot ask for more," he said.
The WHO chief returned to Geneva on Wednesday from China, where he met with the Chinese leadership to discuss cooperation on implementing containment measures in Wuhan (the epicentre of the coronavirus outbreak) and public measures in other cities and provinces, as well as on conducting studies on the severity and transmissibility of the virus, and sharing data and biological material.
He revealed that one of the strategies the WHO and China have agreed on and are following is serious and strong intervention at the epicentre, which helps limit the spread of the virus.
The WHO chief also thanked China for having identified the pathogen in a short time and shared it immediately, which has led to the rapid development of diagnostic tools.
"China has been completely committed to transparency, both internally and externally, and has agreed to work with other countries that need support," he reiterated, citing the latest case in Germany which, due to the immediate notification and sharing of information by the Chinese government, was very quickly identified and given medical care.
The cooperation between China and Germany in responding to the outbreak is a good illustration of how China is engaging with the WHO and other countries based on the principles of solidarity and cooperation, Tedros said.
"The level of commitment (of the leadership) in China is incredible; I will praise China again and again, because its actions actually helped in reducing the spread of the novel coronavirus to other countries... we shall tell the truth and that's the truth," he concluded.
A WHO team of international experts is to visit China as soon as possible to increase the understanding of the outbreak and guide global response efforts.
Tedros also announced that the WHO Emergency Committee will meet again on Thursday to discuss the outbreak.
Earlier, the committee already met twice on Jan 22 and Jan. 23, and decided that the outbreak had not been a "public health emergency of international concern," citing major reasons that the cases of infection outside China were still limited in number and that the Chinese authorities had already implemented very forceful containment measures. - Xinhua
Xi said that the Chinese people are currently engaged in a serious fight against the novel coronavirus outbreak. People's lives and physical health are always the first priority, and prevention and control of the virus is the most important task at present. Xi said: "I have personally been directing the effort and deploying resources, I believe that as long as we strengthen our confidence, help each other, control and prevent the virus appropriately, and implement policies precisely, we will definitely overcome this disease."
The WHO chief said that China has released information transparently, identified pathogens in record time, and proactively shared relevant viral gene sequences with the World Health Organization and other countries. He added the world has admired how the Chinese government has demonstrated firm political determination and adopted timely and powerful policies in the face of the coronavirus. "I believe that the measures taken by China will effectively control and eventually overcome the disease."
Director-General of World Health Organization (WHO) Tedros Adhanom
Ghebreyesus takes part in a news conference after a meeting of the
International Health Regulations (IHR) Emergency Committee for Pneumonia
due to the Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCoV in Geneva, Switzerland on Jan
22, 2020. (Photo credit: Christopher Black/WHO/Handout via REUTERS)
The head of the World Health Organisation said on Tuesday that he is confident in China's ability to contain a new coronavirus that has killed 106 people and that he did not think foreigners should be evacuated, China's foreign ministry said.
A growing number of countries have said they will evacuate their citizens from Wuhan, a central city of 11 million people and the epicentre of the outbreak. A chartered plane taking out U.S. consulate staff was set to leave Wuhan on Wednesday, a spokeswoman at the U.S. embassy in Beijing said. Some space was being offered to other U.S. citizens.
India said it was preparing to evacuate its citizens from Hubei province, of which Wuhan is the capital.
Concern is mounting about the impact of the coronavirus may have on the world's second-biggest economy amid travel bans and an extended Lunar New Year holiday. Global stocks fell again, oil prices hit three-month lows and China's yuan currency dipped to its weakest in 2020.
The head of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, in a meeting with State Councillor Wang Yi in Beijing, said he approved of the government's measures to curb the outbreak, the foreign ministry said.
"Tedros said the WHO does not advocate for countries to evacuate their citizens from China, adding there was no need to overreact," the foreign ministry said in a statement. "He said the WHO is confident in China's ability to prevent and control the epidemic."
The WHO chief, who also met Presiddent Xi Jinping, was not available for comment. A WHO panel of 16 independent experts twice last week declined to declare an international emergency over the outbreak.
The flu-like virus has spread overseas, with Sri Lanka and Germany the latest countries to be hit, but none of the 106 deaths has been outside China and all but six have been in the central city of Wuhan, where the virus emerged last month.
Thailand confirmed six more infections among visitors from China, taking its tally to 14, the highest outside China. Far eastern Russian regions would close their borders with China until Feb. 7, Tass news agency said, citing the regional government.
Chinese-ruled Hong Kong said cross-border ferry services would stop.
Wuhan, where the virus apparently jumped to a human in an illegal wildlife market, has been all but put under quarantine, with a lockdown on transport and bans on gatherings.
Tens of millions of others in Hubei live under some form of travel curbs set up to try to stifle the virus.
The WHO said only one of the overseas cases involved human-to-human transmission.
"That’s still one case too many. But we’re encouraged that so far we have not seen more human-to-human transmission outside China," the WHO said on Twitter.
"We’re monitoring the outbreak constantly."
Tuesday's toll of 106 dead was up from 81 the day before. The number of total confirmed cases in China surged to 4,515 as of Monday from 2,835 the previous day, the National Health Commission said.
Incubation estimates
Analysts said China's travel and tourism would be the hardest-hit sectors, together with retail and liquor sales, though healthcare and online shopping were seen as likely outperformers.
Officially known as "2019-nCoV", the coronavirus can cause pneumonia, but it is too early to know just how dangerous it is and how easily it spreads.
Some health experts question whether China can contain it.
Chinese health officials say the incubation period could range from one to 14 days, and the virus is infectious during that time. The WHO estimated an incubation period of two to 10 days.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday offered China whatever help it needed, while the State Department said Americans should reconsider visiting China.
Canada, which has two infections and 19 potential cases, warned its citizens to avoid travel to Hubei.
Authorities in Hubei, home to nearly 60 million people, have been the focus of public outrage on China's heavily censored social media over what many see as a bungled initial response to the virus.
In rare public self-criticism, Mayor Zhou Xianwang said Wuhan's management of the crisis was "not good enough" and indicated he was willing to resign.
China's ambassador to the United Nations, following a meeting with UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, said his government put "paramount importance" on the epidemic and was working with the international community in a spirit of "openness, transparency and scientific coordination".
Communist Party-ruled China has been eager to seem open in its handling of the epidemic, after it was heavily criticised for efforts to cover up an epidemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) that killed about 800 people globally in 2002-2003.
SARS, which was also believed to have originated in a wildlife market, led to a 45% plunge in air passenger demand in Asia. The travel industry is more reliant on Chinese travellers now, and China's share of the global economy has quadrupled.
With Chinese markets shut for the holiday, investors were selling the offshore yuan and the Australian dollar as a proxy for risk. Oil was also under pressure as fears about the wider fallout grew.