Looks like Taiwan is trapped in COVID hell.
Coronavirus 2019-2020 thread (no unsubstantiated rumours!)
- Thread starter localizer
- Start date
The People's Daily had yet another opinion piece from Zhongyin, one day after this piece where the author argues for keeping the dynamic zero-covid policy.
In this second piece, the author first urges the public to not fall with pandemic fatigue. The author then warns against the opportunism among some that wish to have an easy win over the covid virus.
世界卫生组织10月10日公布的数据显示，全球累计新冠确诊病例数已超6.18亿例，死亡病例数超653万例，今年以来全球死亡病例数已超百万例。当前全球疫情仍在高位流行，病毒仍在不断变异，这深刻警示我们，“躺平”不可取，“躺赢”不可能，坚持动态清零才能最大程度地避免疫情失控造成巨大损失。
In this second piece, the author first urges the public to not fall with pandemic fatigue. The author then warns against the opportunism among some that wish to have an easy win over the covid virus.
人民日报仲音：“躺平”不可取，“躺赢”不可能
世界卫生组织10月10日公布的数据显示，全球累计新冠确诊病例数已超6.18亿例，死亡病例数超653万例，今年以来全球死亡病例数已超百万例。当前全球疫情仍在高位流行，病毒仍在不断变异，这深刻警示我们，“躺平”不可取，“躺赢”不可能，坚持动态清零才能最大程度地避免疫情失控造成巨大损失。
Quickie
Colonel
That is coming a long way from " the vaccine does not have breakthrough issues unlike the case of the inactivated vaccine (from you know which country)", something which we were so used to hearing in those early days of vaccination.
That slowly morphs into the narrative that the vaccines are mostly meant to prevent serious illness and death conveniently blaming the ineffectiveness of the vaccine in preventing transmission on the new virus variants
China is affirming its zero-covid policy. The following is the most recent interview of health authority:
I haven't watched the full interview, so I will post a summary made by people on the internet.
There are four main conclusions:
1) There is no timetable for opening up, we don't have sufficient understanding of the virus mutation. Two session is not a special point of time (for reconsidering and making significant shift in health policies).
2) Medicine and vaccine have not yet reached optimal condition.
3) Recognizes the reduced virulity of the virus. But the absolute number of death will still be too large.
4) Can only do Covid-zeroing, cannot trial (for opening up), otherwise there would be no turning back.
I haven't watched the full interview, so I will post a summary made by people on the internet.
There are four main conclusions:
1) There is no timetable for opening up, we don't have sufficient understanding of the virus mutation. Two session is not a special point of time (for reconsidering and making significant shift in health policies).
2) Medicine and vaccine have not yet reached optimal condition.
3) Recognizes the reduced virulity of the virus. But the absolute number of death will still be too large.
4) Can only do Covid-zeroing, cannot trial (for opening up), otherwise there would be no turning back.
That's the impression that I've been getting all along. It's all about whether the central government sees the pandemic as a political issue or a health care issue. So far all evidences are pointing towards the latter, which is good. If the Chinese government changes policy around the Two Sessions, then they have effectively politicized the pandemic, and I would be very disappointed in this move. Changes in pandemic prevention should be based on changing circumstances of the viral transmission, not on any political events. People thought they would've opened up after the Winter Olympics, but it wasn't the case. This goes along the same line of thought.
broadsword
Brigadier
How about the vaccine trials conducted in several countries that basically affirmed the efficacy?
You mean the ones that relies on self-reporting and didn’t test for asymptomatic cases?
broadsword
Brigadier
I don't know how all those vaccines like Pfizer, Moderna, and Sinovac were tested in countries like Mexico, Chile, Indonesia, the UK, etc.