Vaccination is the best way to protect against influenza. The government, with vaccines sourced from home and abroad, launched an inoculation program on Nov. 1 for those considered at high risk of contracting A(H1N1), or swine flu. It subsequently launched a nationwide immunization program on Dec. 12, hoping to shield the population against the global epidemic.
Despite the government’s all-out campaign, and despite incentives such as cabbage, towels and stationery offered at some locations, the inoculation rate remains short of the targeted 30 percent of the population. Department of Health Minister Yaung Chih-liang (楊志良) said the inoculation rate was around 20 percent as of Tuesday.
Clearly, reports of side effects have dissuaded some people from being vaccinated.
While some may attribute their hesitation to the effectiveness of the vaccines produced by Adimmune Corp — the nation’s sole manufacturer of the H1N1 vaccine for humans — the truth of the matter is the government’s perfunctory handling of complaints and reported side effects has fueled public distrust about the locally produced vaccine and decreased confidence in the vaccination program.
After the inoculation program was launched last month, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said it received a few requests for compensation from people who suffered problems after receiving an H1N1 shot. The complaints ranged from mild dizziness and nausea among students to a high school student who became numb on the left side of her body to two stillbirths and deaths among elderly recipients.
The latest alleged vaccine-related problem is the death of a seven-year-old boy on Monday, 32 days after receiving an H1N1 vaccination. The child’s father, a physician, said his son developed a high fever and a skin rash on Dec. 2.
Each time, the CDC’s answer to these reports has been a quick dismissal that any problems or reported side effects had “nothing to do with the new vaccines,” and that frequency of side effects was similar to other nations.
True, mild dizziness and nausea might be common and thus deemed normal for people who are fearful of vaccinations. There is no evidence in some of the cases that would link the symptoms to the vaccines. There is also no question that, given this nation’s level of medical technology and professionalism, Adimmune could not produce vaccines that are safe and effective. The key, though, is whether the company was given ample time to develop, produce and test this vaccine.
When deaths accompany reported side effects, the Department of Health needs to be prudent and take steps to determine the exact cause of the deaths rather than quickly try to delink the complaints from the vaccine. The CDC’s speedy dismissal of each complaint, without offering an in-depth follow-up or careful review, risks suggesting that the CDC is more concerned with defending Adimmune than guarding public health.
The key to allaying concerns about the vaccine is the government’s attitude. Does it have the sense of responsibility to conduct thorough investigations, or does it remain so self-confident that it is willing to ignore political packaging — as it did in August with Typhoon Morakot?
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS