Connect with us

News

How Japan Keeps the COVID-19 Coronavirus Under Control

Japan covid-19 coronavirus

Despite its proximity to China, Japan hasn’t seen the massive outbreak of the Covid-19 coronavirus that has shut down Europe and North America. What are the Japanese doing differently to help slow the spread?

Coronavirus concerns weren’t on the mind of the many people enjoying Japan’s famed cherry blossoms this past weekend. Thousands of people sat under the pink splendor in parks and along avenues, eating their packed lunches, drinking beer and snapping selfies with the budding blossoms.

“Hanami, the flower show, is the most important event of the year for us Japanese,” said an employee at Ueno Park in Tokyo.

The contrast to Europe could hardly be greater. Japan so far has 10 outbreak clusters, with close to 1,200 confirmed cases and 43 deaths to the coronavirus as of March 24. Only a few dozen new infections are reported every day.

These figures should have exploded — after all, Japan is very densely populated, with the world’s highest density of senior citizens. And it’s in close contact with nearby China, where the disease originated: in January, some 925,000 Chinese people traveled t to Japan, while another 89,000 made the trip in February.

Responding to the coronavirus pandemic, the Japanese government closed all schools two weeks before the spring holidays at the end of March and canceled all public events. But shops and restaurants could remain open, and few Japanese employees decided to work from home.

Containing the spread Covid-19

The low numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases in Japan initially aroused suspicion that the government was covering up the truth.

“After the Fukushima nuclear disaster [in 2011], the government initially refused to admit the reactor meltdowns,” said Barbara Holthus, a sociologist with the German Institute for Japanese Studies in Tokyo. “Today, there remains a great distrust of official statements.”

Despite having the capacity to make 6,000 diagnostic tests per day, Japan has only tested around 14,000 swabs to date — 20 times fewer than neighboring South Korea, which has been hit hard by the pandemic. Only patients with the most severe symptoms are tested, said Masahiro Kami, a virologist at the Medical Governance Research Institute. That, he added, means the number of unreported cases is very high.

Political scientist Koichi Nakano said Prime Minister Shinzo Abe likely wanted to present Japan as a safe country in order not to lose the Summer Olympics — though the International Olympic Committee ended up postponing the event anyway.

Experts at the Health Ministry have repeatedly rejected such criticism, saying they were looking for spikes in COVID-19 cases in order to contain the virus, rather than conducting widespread tests. When the epidemic broke out in a primary school on the northern island of Hokkaido, for example, authorities closed all schools in the prefecture and declared a state of emergency. After three weeks the spread of the virus had been stopped.

“The low number of tests was intended to ensure that health care resources remained available for serious cases of infection,” Sebastian Maslow, a German political scientist at the University of Tokyo, told DW.

Face Masks ‘a part of our everyday lives’

Japanese greeting etiquette — a bow instead of a handshake or a kiss on the cheek — has also played a part in slowing the outbreak, as has basic hygiene education taught from an early age.

“Washing our hands, gargling with a disinfectant solution and wearing masks are part of our everyday lives. We don’t need coronavirus to teach us that,” said a Japanese mother of two. As a result, it was easy for society to switch to anti-infection mode in February when the virus first began to spread. Shops and businesses set up hand sanitizers at the entrance, and it became a civic duty to wear a face mask.

The country typically goes through 5.5 billion face masks every year — 43 per person. Sales of face masks skyrocketed as the virus took hold. Masks have been rationed, and people stand patiently in line waiting for shops to open. Other shops sell strips of fabric and coffee filters, along with instructions for DIY versions.

The Japanese appear to have understood that a person can be infected without showing symptoms, said Michael Paumen, a German business manager who has lived in Japan for many years: “You put the mask on to protect others, so you yourself don’t transmit viruses.”

The widespread use of face masks appears to have slowed down the spread of not just COVID-19, as indicated by the sharp drop in the number of flu patients in the seven weeks since the outbreak of the coronavirus. A recent study by five Western physicians, including Fabian Svara from the Caesar research group in Bonn and Matthias Samwald from the Medical University in Vienna, found that masks “decrease the transmission of droplets or aerosols containing viral particles by mask wearers.”

Apart from social distancing and hand-washing, the experts concluded that face masks could play an important role in slowing down the spread of the virus, pointing out the low infection rates in Japan.

Japan Slowly Returning to Normal

In view of this success, Abe last week refrained from declaring a national state of emergency. Since then, the Japanese have slowly been returning to their everyday lives. Tutoring schools are back in operation, with the children sitting apart from each other in well-ventilated rooms. Amusement parks have reopened, but people running a fever are asked to stay away.

Fearing a second wave of infections, the government has said that, for the time being, only schools in areas without COVID-19 patients will be allowed to open at the beginning of the new school semester in April. A ban remains prohibiting large public events.

Foreign visitors, however, remain a threat according to health authorities, with South Koreans and EU citizens barred from entering the country. Foreigners who live in Japan are allowed to return but must remain in quarantine for 14 days upon arrival. According to unofficial information, the measures will remain in place until at least the end of April. – Deutsche Welle

News

Google’s Search Dominance Is Unwinding, But Still Accounting 48% Search Revenue

Google

Google is so closely associated with its key product that its name is a verb that signifies “search.” However, Google’s dominance in that sector is dwindling.

According to eMarketer, Google will lose control of the US search industry for the first time in decades next year.

Google will remain the dominant search player, accounting for 48% of American search advertising revenue. And, remarkably, Google is still increasing its sales in the field, despite being the dominating player in search since the early days of the George W. Bush administration. However, Amazon is growing at a quicker rate.

google

Google’s Search Dominance Is Unwinding

Amazon will hold over a quarter of US search ad dollars next year, rising to 27% by 2026, while Google will fall even more, according to eMarketer.

The Wall Street Journal was first to report on the forecast.

Lest you think you’ll have to switch to Bing or Yahoo, this isn’t the end of Google or anything really near.

Google is the fourth-most valued public firm in the world. Its market worth is $2.1 trillion, trailing just Apple, Microsoft, and the AI chip darling Nvidia. It also maintains its dominance in other industries, such as display advertisements, where it dominates alongside Facebook’s parent firm Meta, and video ads on YouTube.

To put those “other” firms in context, each is worth more than Delta Air Lines’ total market value. So, yeah, Google is not going anywhere.

Nonetheless, Google faces numerous dangers to its operations, particularly from antitrust regulators.

On Monday, a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that Google must open up its Google Play Store to competitors, dealing a significant blow to the firm in its long-running battle with Fortnite creator Epic Games. Google announced that it would appeal the verdict.

In August, a federal judge ruled that Google has an illegal monopoly on search. That verdict could lead to the dissolution of the company’s search operation. Another antitrust lawsuit filed last month accuses Google of abusing its dominance in the online advertising business.

Meanwhile, European regulators have compelled Google to follow tough new standards, which have resulted in multiple $1 billion-plus fines.

google

Pixa Bay

Google’s Search Dominance Is Unwinding

On top of that, the marketplace is becoming more difficult on its own.

TikTok, the fastest-growing social network, is expanding into the search market. And Amazon has accomplished something few other digital titans have done to date: it has established a habit.

When you want to buy anything, you usually go to Amazon, not Google. Amazon then buys adverts to push companies’ products to the top of your search results, increasing sales and earning Amazon a greater portion of the revenue. According to eMarketer, it is expected to generate $27.8 billion in search revenue in the United States next year, trailing only Google’s $62.9 billion total.

And then there’s AI, the technology that (supposedly) will change everything.

Why search in stilted language for “kendall jenner why bad bunny breakup” or “police moving violation driver rights no stop sign” when you can just ask OpenAI’s ChatGPT, “What’s going on with Kendall Jenner and Bad Bunny?” in “I need help fighting a moving violation involving a stop sign that wasn’t visible.” Google is working on exactly this technology with its Gemini product, but its success is far from guaranteed, especially with Apple collaborating with OpenAI and other businesses rapidly joining the market.

A Google spokeswoman referred to a blog post from last week in which the company unveiled ads in its AI overviews (the AI-generated text that appears at the top of search results). It’s Google’s way of expressing its ability to profit on a changing marketplace while retaining its business, even as its consumers steadily transition to ask-and-answer AI and away from search.

google

Google has long used a single catchphrase to defend itself against opponents who claim it is a monopoly abusing its power: competition is only a click away. Until recently, that seemed comically obtuse. Really? We are going to switch to Bing? Or Duck Duck Go? Give me a break.

But today, it feels more like reality.

Google is in no danger of disappearing. However, every highly dominating company faces some type of reckoning over time. GE, a Dow mainstay for more than a century, was broken up last year and is now a shell of its previous dominance. Sears declared bankruptcy in 2022 and is virtually out of business. US Steel, long the foundation of American manufacturing, is attempting to sell itself to a Japanese corporation.

Could we remember Google in the same way that we remember Yahoo or Ask Jeeves in decades? These next few years could be significant.

SOURCE | CNN

Continue Reading

News

The Supreme Court Turns Down Biden’s Government Appeal in a Texas Emergency Abortion Matter.

Supreme Court

(VOR News) – A ruling that prohibits emergency abortions that contravene the Supreme Court law in the state of Texas, which has one of the most stringent abortion restrictions in the country, has been upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States. The United States Supreme Court upheld this decision.

The justices did not provide any specifics regarding the underlying reasons for their decision to uphold an order from a lower court that declared hospitals cannot be legally obligated to administer abortions if doing so would violate the law in the state of Texas.

Institutions are not required to perform abortions, as stipulated in the decree. The common populace did not investigate any opposing viewpoints. The decision was made just weeks before a presidential election that brought abortion to the forefront of the political agenda.

This decision follows the 2022 Supreme Court ruling that ended abortion nationwide.

In response to a request from the administration of Vice President Joe Biden to overturn the lower court’s decision, the justices expressed their disapproval.

The government contends that hospitals are obligated to perform abortions in compliance with federal legislation when the health or life of an expectant patient is in an exceedingly precarious condition.

This is the case in regions where the procedure is prohibited. The difficulty hospitals in Texas and other states are experiencing in determining whether or not routine care could be in violation of stringent state laws that prohibit abortion has resulted in an increase in the number of complaints concerning pregnant women who are experiencing medical distress being turned away from emergency rooms.

The administration cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in a case that bore a striking resemblance to the one that was presented to it in Idaho at the beginning of the year. The justices took a limited decision in that case to allow the continuation of emergency abortions without interruption while a lawsuit was still being heard.

In contrast, Texas has been a vocal proponent of the injunction’s continued enforcement. Texas has argued that its circumstances are distinct from those of Idaho, as the state does have an exemption for situations that pose a significant hazard to the health of an expectant patient.

According to the state, the discrepancy is the result of this exemption. The state of Idaho had a provision that safeguarded a woman’s life when the issue was first broached; however, it did not include protection for her health.

Certified medical practitioners are not obligated to wait until a woman’s life is in imminent peril before they are legally permitted to perform an abortion, as determined by the state supreme court.

The state of Texas highlighted this to the Supreme Court.

Nevertheless, medical professionals have criticized the Texas statute as being perilously ambiguous, and a medical board has declined to provide a list of all the disorders that are eligible for an exception. Furthermore, the statute has been criticized for its hazardous ambiguity.

For an extended period, termination of pregnancies has been a standard procedure in medical treatment for individuals who have been experiencing significant issues. It is implemented in this manner to prevent catastrophic outcomes, such as sepsis, organ failure, and other severe scenarios.

Nevertheless, medical professionals and hospitals in Texas and other states with strict abortion laws have noted that it is uncertain whether or not these terminations could be in violation of abortion prohibitions that include the possibility of a prison sentence. This is the case in regions where abortion prohibitions are exceedingly restrictive.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which resulted in restrictions on the rights of women to have abortions in several Republican-ruled states, the Texas case was revisited in 2022.

As per the orders that were disclosed by the administration of Vice President Joe Biden, hospitals are still required to provide abortions in cases that are classified as dire emergency.

As stipulated in a piece of health care legislation, the majority of hospitals are obligated to provide medical assistance to patients who are experiencing medical distress. This is in accordance with the law.

The state of Texas maintained that hospitals should not be obligated to provide abortions throughout the litigation, as doing so would violate the state’s constitutional prohibition on abortions. In its January judgment, the 5th United States Circuit Court of Appeals concurred with the state and acknowledged that the administration had exceeded its authority.

SOURCE: AP

SEE ALSO:

Could Last-Minute Surprises Derail Kamala Harris’ Campaign? “Nostradamus” Explains the US Poll.

Scientists Awarded MicroRNA The Nobel Prize in Medicine.

US Inflation will Comfort a Fed Focused on Labor Markets.

Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From ‘Pharma Bro’ Martin Shkreli, To repay $6.4 Million

shkreli

Washington — The Supreme Court rejected Martin Shkreli’s appeal on Monday, after he was branded “Pharma Bro” for raising the price of a lifesaving prescription.

Martin appealed a decision to repay $64.6 million in profits he and his former company earned after monopolizing the pharmaceutical market and dramatically raising its price. His lawyers claimed the money went to his company rather than him personally.

The justices did not explain their reasoning, as is customary, and there were no notable dissents.

Prosecutors, conversely, claimed that the firm had promised to pay $40 million in a settlement and that because Martin orchestrated the plan, he should be held accountable for returning profits.

shkreli

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From ‘Pharma Bro’ Martin Shkreli

Martin was also forced to forfeit the Wu-Tang Clan’s unreleased album “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin,” which has been dubbed the world’s rarest musical album. The multiplatinum hip-hop group auctioned off a single copy of the record in 2015, stipulating that it not be used commercially.

Shkreli was convicted of lying to investors and defrauding them of millions of dollars in two unsuccessful hedge funds he managed. Shkreli was the CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals (later Vyera), which hiked the price of Daraprim from $13.50 to $750 per pill after acquiring exclusive rights to the decades-old medicine in 2015. It cures a rare parasite condition that affects pregnant women, cancer patients, and HIV patients.

shkreli

He defended the choice as an example of capitalism in action, claiming that insurance and other programs ensured that those in need of Daraprim would eventually receive it. However, the move prompted criticism, from the medical community to Congress.

shkreli

Supreme Court Rejects Appeal From ‘Pharma Bro’ Martin Shkreli

Attorney Thomas Huff said the Supreme Court’s Monday ruling was upsetting, but the high court could still overturn a lower court judgment that allowed the $64 million penalty order even though Shkreli had not personally received the money.

“If and when the Supreme Court does so, Mr. Shkreli will have a strong argument for modifying the order accordingly,” he told reporters.

Shkreli was freed from prison in 2022 after serving most of his seven-year sentence.

SOURCE | AP

Continue Reading

Trending