Why has this year’s outbreak of influenza been so destructive? There are several possible reasons.
The anomalous weather patterns. On Jan 24, the northern parts of Taiwan saw snowfall in the plains close to mountain areas for the first time in history. The Lunar New Year holiday period saw low temperatures extended for longer than normally expected. This cold weather exacerbated the spread of influenza.
The Lunar New Year holiday was longer this year and the outbreak occurred later than usual. Instead of breaking out during the Christmas season as in the past, influenza slowly, but steadily, began to spread in late January and continued last month.
Third, for the past two years, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has been trying to empty its remaining stock of the antiviral Relenza, but quite a large proportion of patients find the inhalable powder hard to use.
The outbreak also coincided with a government transition. Lin Tzou-yien (林奏延), who is an expert on influenza, resigned from his post as deputy minister of Health and Welfare. The current minister, Chiang Been-huang (蔣丙煌), lacks medical expertise. In addition, the Feb. 6 earthquake that wreaked havoc in Tainan grabbed media attention and the public was less aware of the threat influenza posed.
In 2009, the CDC abolished a system requiring doctors to report to the government when they observed flu-like symptoms in patients. In absence of this system, there is no mechanism to detect early signs of an epidemic. The result is that the total number of patients with influenza and severe complications is not known until at least 10 days into an outbreak — meanwhile, general practitioners and emergency room doctors fighting the epidemic were left without assistance.
It was only after patients filled every bed in intensive care units that the discussion turned to the issue of closing down schools, and this was too late. Hospitals are using all extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) machines available and the only thing left to do is wait it out and deal with the consequences.
Influenza is more deadly than the Zika virus. The 1918 flu pandemic that killed 40 million people has been a reminder for the past 100 years that influenza should always be feared.Although nowadays we have flu vaccines, antivirals, intensive care units, medical ventilators and ECMO machines, and a much lower fatality rate, influenza remains a threat to human life.
Medical science has made great progress in preventing and treating epidemics. Yet people should still be cautious of influenza, which is highly capricious and mutable. If the global climate were to suddenly change, the entire disease control system on which we rely could become vulnerable. The incoming government should be more vigilant and never count on good luck.
Mayo Kuo is a Taiwan-based pediatrician.
Translated by Yu-an Tu
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his
Retired army major general Yu Pei-chen (于北辰), a former head the Taoyuan chapter of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) veterans branch, on Wednesday last week said that chapter head Tsang You-hsia (臧幼俠) — who dismissed Yu from his position — “would rather see cross-strait unification than yield to the Democratic Progressive Party [DPP] government.” The statement ignited public debate, as it was the first time that a retired officer loyal to the nation — and the KMT — said out loud what has long been rumored among the public: Some KMT members would rather work with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)