When reporters at a recent news conference asked Minister of Health and Welfare Chen Shih-chung (陳時中) why Taiwan’s nucleic acid test for diagnosing COVID-19 is 19 times more expensive than China’s version, he said: “The reason is that our test is more accurate.”
Beijing was not going to let such an “impudent” remark go unpunished and China’s Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) spokeswoman Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) duly took the matter up in the following TAO news conference, pointedly referring to Taiwan’s minister of health and welfare as simply “that man.”
Zhu said that large-scale government-administered COVID-19 tests are free of charge in China, and if individual nucleic acid tests are required according to personal needs, this costs the equivalent of NT$344 to NT$516.
Zhu proudly said that China’s screening for the virus is extremely accurate and advised “that man” to have an honest conversation with the public over the cost of Taiwan’s “expensive” nucleic acid test, which Zhu said cost about NT$7,000.
It should not be left up to the TAO to say whether China’s COVID-19 screening is accurate. Let us examine the facts:
At the end of March last year, the Czech Republic ordered 300,000 rapid kits from China.
However, Czech medical officials found that up to 80 percent of the testing kits were faulty.
When Beijing argued that the kits were being used incorrectly, the Czech Minister for Health revised down the defective rate to “only” 20 to 30 percent.
The Spanish Ministry of Health initially determined that 8,000 Chinese rapid testing kits it had purchased from China were defective, but the number of defective kits that had to be returned to the manufacturer later rose to 58,000.
At about the same time, Turkish health officials verified that a batch of testing kits they had received from a Chinese manufacturer were only 30 to 35 percent accurate and were abandoned.
Meanwhile, the British Department of Health and Social Care determined that the type of antibody test kits produced by China were unreliable in COVID-19 patients with only mild symptoms.
As the saying goes: “You get what you pay for.” By purchasing the cheapest product, you might be able to save a quick buck, but you will pay dearly in the fullness of time.
At the same time, you should always shop around to ensure you get the best price and are not being overcharged. These are the cardinal rules of shopping that savvy consumers intuitively understand.
COVID-19 testing kits cost about US$250 per test in the US; in the UK, they cost ￡130 to ￡200 (US$178 to US$273); and Japanese tests cost ￥25,000 to ￥50,000 (US$238 to US$476).
Put into context, as a consumer would you trust China’s discount tests? Would you believe the braggadocio of a Chinese official, or the words of “that man” who has established public credibility over the past year?
As a rational consumer should you believe the Chinese dictatorship with its track record of coverups and lies, or the transparent and accountable information provided by Taiwan’s democratic institutions?
The answer should be obvious to anyone with their head screwed on straight.
Chin Ching is an educator.
Translated by Edward Jones
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
RSS