Taiwan’s number of COVID-19 cases has increased over the past week. The government’s prevention information strongly promotes masks and hand hygiene, and recommends that alcohol sanitizers or other disinfectants be sprayed on clothes after returning home.
However, there is one widely overlooked source of infection: mobile phones. They should also be disinfected and their use restricted.
Over the past few days, many COVID-19 testing stations have been set up, with people lining up. Everyone has their temperature taken and they wear masks, but during the wait, they never stop playing with their smartphones.
The same happens on public transportation, with people heedless about what they have touched.
The virus can be transferred to a phone from unwashed hands, so using a device after returning home without first disinfecting it is a concerning infection risk.
Studies have shown that viruses remain on phones longer than on clothes, and that more than 50 percent of viral infections are transmitted via the hands, potentially turning phones into virus carriers.
An infection can potentially occur if a hand that just touched a phone goes to the face or food.
People generally are not in the habit of disinfecting phones. They just put them in their pocket or bag after they have finished using them.
Even in the middle of a pandemic, when people diligently sanitize their hands, they forget their phones. Once they arrive home, they might be infected via a virus-laden device.
As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, people must not let their phones become a source of infection.
The government should provide more information about phone disinfection and instruct people to lower the risks by taking into account the potential infection route their phones create.
Furthermore, people should be careful about using their phones on public transportation and in other busy places, and remember to disinfect them if they do.
Lu Chien-chi is chairman of the Taiwan Philosophical Counseling Association.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS