[新聞] 金融時報：台灣表示WHO未對武漢肺炎預警
※發文無1~6小標格式或未依順序任意刪除者會被刪文
1.媒體來源:
※ 例如蘋果日報、自由時報（請參考版規下方的核准媒體名單）
英國金融時報
2.記者署名
※ 沒有在這打上記者署名的新聞會被水桶14天 編輯非記者
※ 外電至少要有來源或編輯 如:法新社
Reporting by Primrose Riordan in Hong Kong, Katrina Manson in Washington,
Kathrin Hille in Taipei and Clive Cookson in London
3.完整新聞標題:
※ 標題沒有完整寫出來 ---> 依照板規刪除文章
Taiwan says WHO failed to act on coronavirus transmission warning
台灣表示WHO未能對武漢肺炎傳播做出預警
Relationship with Beijing blamed for not sharing alert over human-to-human
infection
與北京的關係被責難於在人傳人感染上沒有共享情報
4.完整新聞內文:
※ 社論特稿都不能貼！違者刪除（政治類水桶3個月)，貼廣告也會被刪除喔！可詳看版規
Taiwan has accused the World Health Organization of failing to communicate an
early warning about transmission of the coronavirus between humans, slowing
the global response to the pandemic.
台灣指責WHO未能在武漢肺炎人傳人感染發出預警，減緩了全球對此流行病的應對。
Health officials in Taipei said they alerted the WHO at the end of December
about the risk of human-to-human transmission of the new virus but said its
concerns were not passed on to other countries.
台北的衛生官員表示，他們在12月底就這種新病毒的人傳人風險向WHO發出了警告，但WHO沒
有向其他國家傳達這種憂心。
Taiwan is excluded from the WHO because China, which claims it as part of its
territory, demands that third countries and international bodies do not treat
it in any way that resembles how independent states are treated.
台灣被排除在WHO之外，係因為中國要求第三國、國際組織不要以任何類似於獨立國家的方
式對待台灣。中國宣稱台灣是其領土的一部分。
The WHO’s relationship with China has been criticised in the past, with some
accusing the organisation of overly praising Beijing’s handling of the
coronavirus outbreak despite allegations local officials had initially
covered it up.
WHO與中國的關係在過去曾受到批評，有人指責WHO過分地稱讚北京處理武漢肺炎疫情的方
式，儘管當地官員最初曾經被指控掩蓋事實。
Taiwan said its doctors had heard from mainland colleagues that medical staff
were getting ill — a sign of human-to-human transmission. Taipei officials
said they reported this to both International Health Regulations (IHR), a WHO
framework for exchange of epidemic prevention and response data between 196
countries, and Chinese health authorities on December 31.
台灣表示，台灣醫生從中國籍同事那裡聽說，醫務人員正在染病——這是人傳人的跡象。
台北官員表示，他們已於12月31日向《國際衛生條例》（IHR）和中國衛生當局報告了這一
情況。《國際衛生條例》是世衛組織在196個國家之間，交換疫情控制和應對數據的架構。
Taiwanese government officials told the Financial Times the warning was not
shared with other countries.
台灣政府官員告訴金融時報，這份警告並沒有傳達給其他國家。
“While the IHR’s internal website provides a platform for all countries to
share information on the epidemic and their response, none of the information
shared by our country’s [Centers for Disease Control] is being put up there,
” said Chen Chien-jen, Taiwan’s vice-president.
台灣副總統陳建仁表示：「雖然說《國際衛生條例》的內部網站為所有國家提供了一個共
享疫情資訊及其應對措施的平台，但我國（疾管署）分享的訊息並沒有出現在那裡。」
The WHO could not obtain first-hand information to study and judge whether
there was human-to-human transmission of Covid-19. This led it to announce
human-to-human transmission with a delay, and an opportunity to raise the
alert level both in China and the wider world was lost,” said Mr Chen, an
epidemiologist by training who was health minister at the time of the Sars
outbreak.
陳建仁表示，WHO無法獲得第一手資料來研究、判斷COVID-19病毒是否存在人傳人的現象。
這導致WHO延後宣布人傳人的發生，失去一個在中國，乃至於全世界提高警戒級別的機會。
陳建仁是一名受過培訓的流行病學家，曾在SARS爆發時擔任衛生部長（衛生署長）。
China’s health ministry only confirmed human-to-human transmission on
January 20, after the WHO said in mid-January there might be “limited”
human-to-human transmission but stepped back from this view on the same day.
中國衛生部在1月20日才確認人傳人。此前WHO在1月中曾經表示，可能存在「有限度的」人
傳人，但同一天又放棄了這個觀點。
Asked about the comments, the WHO said under its mandate it needed trust to “
hold frank and open discussions on sometimes sensitive issues” and to enable
this level of candour “requires that we respect the confidentiality of such
communications”. Western countries have since been accused of failing to act
even when they were warned about human-to-human transmission.
在被問及這些評論時，WHO表示，根據授權，它需要信賴，以便「有時就敏感的問題進行坦
誠、公開的討論」，並「要求我們尊重此類溝通的保密性」，以讓這種程度的坦誠成為可
能。之後西方國家一直被指責未能採取行動，即使有人警告它們注意人傳人。
The WHO has had to strike a delicate balance with China throughout the
outbreak, with some accusing the organisation of being too pliant while
medical experts said it had coped admirably.
在整個疫情爆發期間，WHO不得不與中國保持微妙的平衡，一些人指責WHO過於聽話，而一
些醫學專家表示，WHO的應對令人敬佩。
The challenge of managing the relationship extended to negotiations over the
wording of a report following a joint mission to China last month. The
nine-day trip comprised 12 WHO experts and 13 Chinese officials and was
focused on the country’s response to the outbreak. Three of the WHO
officials also visited Wuhan, the centre of the outbreak, as part of the
mission.
處理雙方關係的挑戰，還延伸到上月聯合訪問中國之後，關於一份報告措辭的談判。為期
九天的訪問，由12名世衛組織專家和13名中國官員組成，重點關心於中國對疫情的反應。
WHO的三名官員還作為訪問團的一部分訪問了疫情中心武漢。
The WHO’s Bruce Aylward, the Canadian epidemiologist who led the team,
described the process as “fantastic”. But he told the FT there was “huge
back and forth” with Chinese officials about what went into the report.
WHO的Bruce Aylward，領導該小組的加拿大籍傳染病學家，形容過程是「fantastic」的，
但他對金融時報表示，對於報告的內容，中國官員「反反覆覆討論」。
Dr Aylward said Chinese health officials did not want to refer to the
pathogen as “dangerous” as they regarded such terminology as reserved for
diseases with higher mortality rates.
Aylward博士表示，中國衛生官員不希望將這種病原體稱作「危險」，因為他們認為這種術
語只適用於死亡率較高的疾病。
Chinese health officials also refused to include any reference to avoiding a
“second wave” of coronavirus in the report, he said, so they compromised on
“a surge” or “resurgence”.
他說，中國衛生官員也拒絕在報告中提及避免武漢肺炎的「第二波」，因此他們在
「surge」（暴增）或「resurgence」（再現）上妥協。
Dale Fisher, an infectious disease specialist at the National University of
Singapore, said the team’s Chinese counterparts requested the report not
make reference to a “dangerous pathogen” because they said it had a “
bioterrorism type suggestion”, so they found a replacement.
新加坡國立大學（NUS）的傳染病專家Dale Fisher表示，中國方面要求報告不要提及「危
險病原體」，因為他們認為這是一種「生化恐怖主義式的暗示」，所以他們找到了一種替
代詞。
Clifford Lane, clinical director of America’s National Institute of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases who was one of two US officials on the mission, said
the WHO team’s Chinese members had “a great desire to be precise”. He said
the debates over wording did not amount to censorship but represented a “bit
of spin”.
美國國家過敏和傳染病研究所臨床科主任Clifford Lane是參與此次任務的兩名美國官員之
一。他表示，WHO工作組的中國成員「非常希望做到精確」。他表示，圍繞措辭的爭論並不
等同於審查工作，而是「有點鬼扯」。
China’s ministry of health did not respond to requests for comment.
中國衛生部對此不表示評論。
Despite the criticism, the WHO has impressed many medical professionals and
public health experts with its speed and effectiveness.
儘管存在這些批評，WHO其速度和效力給許多醫療人士和公共衛生專家留下了深刻印象。
“The WHO has filled its leadership role admirably,” said Mark Woolhouse,
professor of infectious disease epidemiology at Edinburgh University. “
Though you could quibble a bit about timings, they have done all the right
things so far.”
愛丁堡大學的傳染病學家Mark Woolhouse表示，WHO出色地發揮了其領導作用。 「雖然你
可以對時間問題吹毛求疵，但迄今為止，他們做的一切都是正確的。 」
Dr Aylward added that whenever Chinese officials were reluctant to carry out
a request or grant him access or were taken aback at his demands, he would
always answer: “You can’t rule out another Wuhan if you don’t know how and
when this started.”
Aylward博士補充說，每當中國官員不情願執行一項請求或不願讓他進入，或對他的要求感
到吃驚時，他總是會回答，「如果你不知道這是何時如何開始的，你就沒辦法排除另一個
武漢。」
He said that was always “the trigger point for them”.
他說這總是「他們之間的導火線」。
“They don’t want another Wuhan,” he said.
「他們不想看到另一個武漢」，他說。
5.完整新聞連結 (或短網址):
※ 當新聞連結過長時，需提供短網址方便網友點擊
https://www.ft.com/content/2a70a02a-644a-11ea-a6cd-df28cc3c6a68
6.備註:
※ 一個人一天只能張貼一則新聞，被刪或自刪也算額度內，超貼者水桶，請注意
評論區
Libararian21
66人按讚
The Chinese Communist Party's impact on the world is truly insidious. At
least the Soviets were poor.
Juviens
43人按讚
China , the world should and will not forget what your rotten dictatorial
system caused . The exclusion of Taiwan ( one of the few countries which
reacted admirably against the virus ) from WHO's information / decision
network at the instigation of China is nothing but criminal and both WHO
leadership and Xi carry the responsibility .
--
→
01/04 15:52,
01/04 15:52
→
01/04 15:52,
01/04 15:52
→
01/04 15:54,
01/04 15:54
→
01/04 15:55,
01/04 15:55
→
01/04 16:08,
01/04 16:08
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 140.116.132.127 (臺灣)
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1584715958.A.176.html
→
03/20 22:53,
4年前
, 1F
03/20 22:53, 1F
→
03/20 22:53,
4年前
, 2F
03/20 22:53, 2F
推
03/20 22:53,
4年前
, 3F
03/20 22:53, 3F
推
03/20 22:54,
4年前
, 4F
03/20 22:54, 4F
→
03/20 22:54,
4年前
, 5F
03/20 22:54, 5F
台灣12月就傳資料過去了
推
03/20 22:54,
4年前
, 6F
03/20 22:54, 6F
推
03/20 22:54,
4年前
, 7F
03/20 22:54, 7F
推
03/20 22:55,
4年前
, 8F
03/20 22:55, 8F
推
03/20 22:56,
4年前
, 9F
03/20 22:56, 9F
推
03/20 22:56,
4年前
, 10F
03/20 22:56, 10F
推
03/20 22:57,
4年前
, 11F
03/20 22:57, 11F
推
03/20 22:57,
4年前
, 12F
03/20 22:57, 12F
推
03/20 22:58,
4年前
, 13F
03/20 22:58, 13F
→
03/20 22:58,
4年前
, 14F
03/20 22:58, 14F
奇怪是文章太長沒人看完嗎= =
※ 編輯: pikakami (140.116.132.127 臺灣), 03/20/2020 23:00:33
推
03/20 22:59,
4年前
, 15F
03/20 22:59, 15F
推
03/20 22:59,
4年前
, 16F
03/20 22:59, 16F
→
03/20 23:00,
4年前
, 17F
03/20 23:00, 17F
→
03/20 23:00,
4年前
, 18F
03/20 23:00, 18F
推
03/20 23:00,
4年前
, 19F
03/20 23:00, 19F
→
03/20 23:00,
4年前
, 20F
03/20 23:00, 20F
推
03/20 23:00,
4年前
, 21F
03/20 23:00, 21F
噓
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 22F
03/20 23:01, 22F
→
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 23F
03/20 23:01, 23F
→
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 24F
03/20 23:01, 24F
推
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 25F
03/20 23:01, 25F
推
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 26F
03/20 23:01, 26F
→
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 27F
03/20 23:01, 27F
→
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 28F
03/20 23:01, 28F
推
03/20 23:01,
4年前
, 29F
03/20 23:01, 29F
推
03/20 23:02,
4年前
, 30F
03/20 23:02, 30F
→
03/20 23:02,
4年前
, 31F
03/20 23:02, 31F
還有 172 則推文
還有 4 段內文
推
03/21 04:40,
4年前
, 204F
03/21 04:40, 204F
→
03/21 04:41,
4年前
, 205F
03/21 04:41, 205F
推
03/21 04:43,
4年前
, 206F
03/21 04:43, 206F
噓
03/21 05:22,
4年前
, 207F
03/21 05:22, 207F
→
03/21 06:22,
4年前
, 208F
03/21 06:22, 208F
噓
03/21 07:06,
4年前
, 209F
03/21 07:06, 209F
推
03/21 07:33,
4年前
, 210F
03/21 07:33, 210F
推
03/21 07:34,
4年前
, 211F
03/21 07:34, 211F
→
03/21 07:34,
4年前
, 212F
03/21 07:34, 212F
推
03/21 07:38,
4年前
, 213F
03/21 07:38, 213F
推
03/21 08:08,
4年前
, 214F
03/21 08:08, 214F
推
03/21 08:15,
4年前
, 215F
03/21 08:15, 215F
推
03/21 08:30,
4年前
, 216F
03/21 08:30, 216F
→
03/21 08:40,
4年前
, 217F
03/21 08:40, 217F
推
03/21 08:52,
4年前
, 218F
03/21 08:52, 218F
→
03/21 08:52,
4年前
, 219F
03/21 08:52, 219F
推
03/21 08:58,
4年前
, 220F
03/21 08:58, 220F
噓
03/21 09:01,
4年前
, 221F
03/21 09:01, 221F
推
03/21 09:14,
4年前
, 222F
03/21 09:14, 222F
推
03/21 09:27,
4年前
, 223F
03/21 09:27, 223F
推
03/21 09:36,
4年前
, 224F
03/21 09:36, 224F
推
03/21 09:38,
4年前
, 225F
03/21 09:38, 225F
推
03/21 09:42,
4年前
, 226F
03/21 09:42, 226F
推
03/21 09:50,
4年前
, 227F
03/21 09:50, 227F
推
03/21 09:56,
4年前
, 228F
03/21 09:56, 228F
→
03/21 10:24,
4年前
, 229F
03/21 10:24, 229F
→
03/21 10:25,
4年前
, 230F
03/21 10:25, 230F
推
03/21 10:28,
4年前
, 231F
03/21 10:28, 231F
推
03/21 10:30,
4年前
, 232F
03/21 10:30, 232F
→
03/21 10:31,
4年前
, 233F
03/21 10:31, 233F
推
03/21 12:04,
4年前
, 234F
03/21 12:04, 234F
推
03/21 13:00,
4年前
, 235F
03/21 13:00, 235F
推
03/21 13:32,
4年前
, 236F
03/21 13:32, 236F
→
03/21 13:32,
4年前
, 237F
03/21 13:32, 237F
推
03/21 13:40,
4年前
, 238F
03/21 13:40, 238F
→
03/21 13:40,
4年前
, 239F
03/21 13:40, 239F
推
03/21 15:02,
4年前
, 240F
03/21 15:02, 240F
推
03/21 15:10,
4年前
, 241F
03/21 15:10, 241F
推
03/21 22:07,
4年前
, 242F
03/21 22:07, 242F
推
03/22 00:00,
4年前
, 243F
03/22 00:00, 243F