Home Blog Page 8428

COVID-19: Not just a global public health emergency

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) disease outbreak as Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) on Jan. 30. The WHO International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005), 3rd edition defines PHEIC “as an extraordinary event which is determined, as provided in these Regulations (i) to constitute a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease and (ii) to potentially require a coordinated international response.” Public health risk is defined as “a likelihood of an event that may affect adversely the health of human populations, with an emphasis on one which may spread internationally or may present a serious and direct danger.” WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus explained during a news conference at WHO’s Geneva headquarters that the declaration of 2019-nCov outbreak as PHEIC was made because of “the potential for the virus to spread to countries with weaker health systems, and which are ill-prepared to deal with the disease outbreak.” At the time of the declaration, the WHO recorded 7,834 confirmed cases, including 7,736 in China, and 98 cases in 18 countries outside China, plus eight cases of human-to-human transmission in four countries: Germany, Japan, Vietnam, and the United States of America. WHO also recorded 170 deaths all in China due to the outbreak.

The 2019-nCov was first reported from Wuhan, China on Dec. 31, 2019. Almost six weeks later, on Feb. 11, the WHO announced an official name for the disease. The disease caused by 2019-nCov was officially named COVID-19, where “CO” stands for “corona,” “VI” for “virus,” and “D” for “disease” while “19” was for the year the outbreak was first identified in December 2019.

Ghebreyesus explained that under agreed guidelines between WHO, the World Organisation for Animal Health, and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, there was a need “to find a name that did not refer to a geographical location, an animal, an individual or group of people and which is also pronounceable and related to the disease.” Based on “WHO Best Practices for the Naming of New Human Infectious Diseases” document dated May 2015, the aim is “to minimize unnecessary negative impact of disease names on trade, travel, tourism or animal welfare, and avoid causing offence to any cultural, social, national, regional, professional or ethnic groups.”

Almost two weeks after being declared as PHEIC, COVID-19 has already infected 42,708 people in China and 393 people in 24 countries worldwide. There have been 1,017 deaths in China, mostly in Wuhan in Hubei province, while one death of a Chinese national outside China was reported in the Philippines. A second death due to COVID-19 was reported in Hong Kong.

During the news conference wherein the coronavirus outbreak was declared as PHEIC, Ghebreyesus congratulated China “for the extraordinary measures it has taken to contain the outbreak despite the severe social and economic impact those measures are having on the Chinese people.” But has China succeeded in containing the outbreak? And didn’t WHO’s declaration of the disease outbreak as PHEIC and renaming of the disease come a little too late?

The numbers of confirmed cases and deaths keep on increasing despite global and national responses to COVID-19. As of Feb. 160, the “WHO Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) Situation Report — 27” recorded 51,857 laboratory-confirmed cases (1,278 new) globally; 51,174 laboratory-confirmed cases (1,121 new), and 1,666 deaths (142 new) in China; and 683 laboratory-confirmed cases (157 new) in 25 countries and three deaths (one new) outside of China.

Various international news services have documented how China’s lockdown of a number of its cities has caused misery among its own people and caused a flared up of old anti-government sentiments. Outside China, the effects of COVID-19 are quite alarming.

In what seemed like an outbreak of anti-China and anti-Chinese hatred and revulsion, anti-China and anti-Chinese posts, messages, and tweets flooded cyberspace in almost every part of the world. Since the outbreak, international and national news reports were never empty of anti-Chinese incidents and confrontations in public places, including in institutions of higher learning.

While containing the COVID-19 outbreak remains high on the global and national agenda, COVID-19 has created or is creating another outbreak, inciting “moral panic” across the globe resulting in increased feelings of fear and anxiety exacerbated by feelings of lack of protection and certainty.

Who is manipulating the COVID-19 outbreak to cause moral panic across the globe? What is there to gain for these manipulators of moral panic or these moral entrepreneurs?

In his 1972 book Folk Devils and Moral Panics, known moral panic theorist Stanley Cohen defined moral panics in the following manner:

“Societies appear to be subject, every now and then, to periods of moral panic. A condition, episode, person or group of persons emerges to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature is presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media; the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to; the condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and becomes more visible. Sometimes the object of the panic is quite novel and at other times it is something which has been in existence long enough but suddenly appears in the limelight” (p.9).

Is there a justified cause for moral panic among us?

At the State level, the COVID-19 outbreak revealed not only the increased vulnerabilities of States, particularly those with weak public health infrastructures, it also intensified citizens and media’s increased demand for transparency and accountability from their governments in spite of governments’ increased call for tolerance and calm from their citizens and media.

At the global level, COVID-19 re-opened debates on the question, “Is the world better prepared?” In terms of a global public health response, COVID-19 resurrects debates about the weaknesses or limitations of the existing global health security regime. But have we created a global security regime? Empirical evidence shows that the answer is a “No.”

First, the WHO is considered as the supranational health authority. Despite its tremendous success in new Health Emergencies Programs and revised International Health Regulations (IHR 2005), all aimed at enabling a faster, more effective response to outbreaks and emergencies, the organization faces financial capacity limitations that affect the effectiveness of its organization and operations.

Second, the IHR (2005) requires all countries to develop, strengthen, and maintain eight core public health capacities, namely: 1.) national legislation, policy and financing; 2.) coordination and national focal point communications; 3.) surveillance; 4.) response; 5.) preparedness; 6.) risk communication; 7.) human resources; and, 8.) laboratory. However, the document “Lessons learnt from implementation of the International Health Regulations: a systematic review,” submitted to the WHO in 2017, revealed that “[g]iven varying levels of health and socioeconomic development across countries, there have been challenges in implementing these requirements… [b]y the original deadline of June 2012, only 42 (22%) of the 192 WHO Member States had met the core capacity requirements” (p. 110).

Third, issues of State sovereignty clash with the WHO’s mandate and its global legislation in the form of the IHR. The IHR 2005 has strengthened WHO’s position as a central global force with authority and accountability in the field of international health. But WHO’s position is constrained when States assert their national sovereignty.

The challenges are real as captured by former WHO Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan in her report, titled, “Ten years in public health 2007 — 2017” (2017) — “the factors that govern global health security extend well beyond the mandate of WHO and its capacity to respond… [m]uch responsibility falls to countries… affected countries need to report unusual disease events promptly and openly… [and] countries move out of the sanctuary of national sovereignty in the interest of common good” (p.26).

If not WHO, who will lead the charge of reforming the existing global health security regime? If the concept of WHO as a supranational health authority is evolving, then is the global health security regime still in the making? How many more disease outbreaks and how many more lives must be lost to disease outbreaks to attain a global health security regime? Finally, is the world better prepared to face COVID-19? Or is this article contributing to moral panic around the world?

 

Diana J. Mendoza, PhD, is Chair of the Department of Political Science at the Ateneo de Manila University.

Why PSALM and NEA should go

 

Recently there was a story on the huge debt of the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. (PSALM) because it could not collect P59 billion from independent power producers (IPPs) and electric cooperatives (ECs). That is a big amount and PSALM continues to collect various universal charges (UC) for the various stranded costs and debts of the National Power Corp. (NPC).

The UC and PSALM were created by the EPIRA law of 2001. PSALM has three core functions: (a) privatize NPC generation and Transco transmission assets, (b) manage liabilities of NPC debts, obligations of electric coops to NEA and other agencies, and (c) administer the collection and disbursement of UC funds.

The current UC rate of nearly 38 centavos/kWh is big and UC remittances received by PSALM are big, and it petitions the ERC to avail of huge funds (see Table 1).

The four UCs components are as follows:

1. ME — a subsidy for electricity supply in small island provinces and far-flung areas.

2. SCC — excess of the contracted cost of electricity by NPC over actual selling price.

3. SD — financial obligations of NPC still unliquidated by privatization proceeds of NPC assets.

4. EC — for watershed rehabilitation and management.

PSALM is administering a huge pile of cash from us electricity consumers — P183 billion as of September 2019. Two sore thumbs sticking out here.

One, the ME subsidy for small island provinces and far away areas seem like they will go on forever when they should have been eliminated. Debureaucratize the construction of their own baseload, 24/7 power plants and just augment with big gensets running on diesel during peak hours. Then NPC-SPUG (small power utility group) can be privatized and/or eliminated as well.

Two, those old SCCs and SDs by NPC have been there since the early 1990s, and after nearly three decades they are still there and the UC rates do not seem to decline through time — Wow! PSALM, being a generation player managing and operating unprivatized NPC plants, can “sell low” power at a loss then raid the UC funds to recover its losses and appear to be financially healthy. This is lousy and creates a moral hazards problem. PSALM will have little or no incentive to hasten the privatization of the remaining NPC plants. It can become a forever bureaucracy funded by forever UC subsidies, and it can distort competition in the Philippines electricity market. PSALM should go.

On ECs, they are created by politics via Congressional franchising, monitored and even pampered by politics via the National Electrification Administration (NEA). With such high political backing, many ECs are either mismanaged and/or remain inefficient, with persistent blackouts for their franchise areas. Some also do not pay their gencos. ECs run to the NEA for loans instead of commercial banks. There are huge taxpayers subsidies given to NEA annually, mostly for sitio electrification program (SEP, see Table 2).

Around 2017, the Department of Energy identified 17 ECs that are chronic failures when it comes to providing satisfactory services to their customers — ALECO (Albay), CASURECO III (Camarines Sur), FICELCO (Catanduanes), MASELCO (Masbate), OMECO (Occidental Mindoro), ORMECO (Oriental Mindoro), and PALECO (Palawan). Other problematic ECs are PELCO (Pampanga), BASELCO (Basilan), LASURECO (Lanao), SULECO (Sulu), and ZAMCELCO (Zamboanga), DANECO (Davao del Norte).

All ECs should become corporations and depoliticized, and be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and not with NEA. We now have one-person corporations, so how come these big ECs cannot be corporatized? NEA as regulator-bureaucracy should go, at least its monitoring function of ECs.

Last week, I saw one article entitled “MVP’s monopoly of power and water supply.”

Fake news. There is no such thing as a “monopoly of power,” whether by MPIC or San Miguel or Ayala, etc., whether in power generation, in power distribution, or retail supply. See the list of players at the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM) for the Luzon and Visayas grids only (see Table 3).

Nationwide, including the Mindanao grid, there are a total of 155 electricity distributors: 21 DUs, 11 Ecozones, and 123 ECs. And to say there is a “monopoly of water supply” is also fake news. There are 584 water distributors nationwide.

 

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the president of Minimal Government Thinkers.

minimalgovernment@gmail.com

Has DICT Undersecretary Rio decided to stay on the tiger?

On Feb. 3, Undersecretary of the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) Eliseo Rio, Jr. told CNN Philippines, “I filed my resignation and (am) awaiting acceptance of the President.” He said he sent his letter to Malacañang on Jan. 31.

He gave as the reason for his resignation his conflict with other officials in the department. “I cannot work with the undersecretaries and assistant secretaries. I’m supposed to be Undersecretary of Operations, but they are not involving me in decisions. Operations and intelligence work are very close, so whatever intel we get, Operations must be involved. I might as well get out, the salary being given to me would be a waste.”

Mr. Rio also questioned the need for a P400 million confidential fund for the agency in 2019 — an amount which DICT Secretary Gregorio Honasan put in the DICT’s budget when he was still a senator. “As far as I’m concerned, DICT does not need any confidential funds. It is not our mandate to conduct surveillance and intelligence activities. I would rather have it given to the National Bureau of Investigation and the police,” Mr. Rio said.

In an interview over ANC on the same day, Mr. Rio said, “I feel that I’m no longer needed in DICT. Now I’m 75. I thought that now would be time to really spend my time with my family. Secretary Honasan has brought in young people and maybe they should be given more chance to work.”

Mr. Rio is a licensed electronics and communications engineer. He placed 4th in the 1971 board exams. He held various positions in the Armed Forces of the Philippines, including as head of the AFP Research and Development Center Communication-Electronics R&D Group, group commander of Military Intelligence Group 21 and Electronics Technical Intelligence Group of the Intelligence Service, Assistant Chief of Staff for Communication, Electronics and Information System of the Philippine Army, Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines Communication, Electronics and Information Systems Service, and Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications, Electronics and Information Systems. He retired from the Armed Forces as Brigadier General in October 2000.

Because of his extensive background in Communications, he was appointed to the National Telecommunications Commission in 2001 and, beginning September 2017, was the DICT officer-in-charge. On Oct. 10, 2017, following the resignation of Rodolfo Salalima as DICT Secretary, he was appointed officer-in-charge of the department upon the instructions of President Duterte. He was then elevated to Acting Secretary of the department in May 2018. People expected him to be appointed Secretary of DICT. To their surprise, the President announced that Mr. Honasan, who is not an electronics engineer nor a communications professional, would be the DICT Secretary upon the expiration of his term as senator in June 2019.

President Duterte still has to act on Mr. Rio’s resignation. If the President accepts it, he would be the first member of the Duterte Cabinet to resign on the basis of irreconcilable difference with his superior. He would be included in that honorable class of past Cabinet members who resigned on the basis of principle: Marcos’ Executive Secretary Rafael Salas, Arroyo’s Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo, Secretaries Corazon Soliman of Social Welfare, Florencio Abad of Education, Cesar Purisima of Finance, Juan Santos of Trade and Industry, Emilia Boncodin of Budget and Management, Rene Villa of Agrarian Reform, and Benigno Aquino III’s Transportation and Communications Secretary Jose de Jesus.

However, on Feb. 7, Messrs. Honasan and Rio released a joint statement. Here are excerpts of it:

“We, Secretary Gregorio B. Honasan II, and Undersecretary Eliseo M. Rio, Jr., issue this statement to put to rest any question on the integrity of the Department of Information and Communications Technology.

“We assure the Filipino people and the members of our DICT family that we have reassessed the situation, and have mutually agreed to settle our differences. The Confidential Expenses and its use in support of your DICT’s mandate are not in question. In fact, it was Undersecretary Rio who proposed the inclusion of the Confidential Expense item in the 2019 General Appropriations Act. Let it also be clarified that Undersecretary Rio’s resignation was due to personal reasons, and not due to any rift with the Secretary. The use of the Confidential Expense is for lawful monitoring and surveillance of systems and network infrastructure only.

“Undersecretary Rio stands behind the Secretary and gives his full support to your DICT’s programs and projects.”

It is supposed to be a joint statement of Mr. Honasan and Mr. Rio but it reads like the statement of Mr. Honasan alone as it refers to Mr. Rio as a third person. Parts of the statement are contradictory. “Undersecretary Rio’s resignation was… not due to any rift with the Secretary” runs counter to “We have ….mutually agreed to settle our differences.” That Mr. Rio resignation was due to personal reasons is in conflict with what Mr. Rio had told media. In the interview with CNN Philippines he said, “I cannot work with the undersecretaries and assistant secretaries…. they are not involving me in decisions. I might as well get out” To ANC he said, “I feel that I’m no longer needed in DICT. Secretary Honasan has brought in young people and maybe they should be given more chance to work.”

The use of the Confidential Expense for lawful monitoring and surveillance of systems and network infrastructure is precisely what Mr. Rio questioned. The sentence “Undersecretary Rio stands behind the Secretary” betrays who the real writer of the statement is.

Mr. Rio said that if President Duterte turns down his resignation, he would accept the position offered him by Secretary Honasan: Head of the National Broadband Plan Backbone and Free Wi-Fi Internet Access in Public Places. There is a Chinese idiom “Ride a tiger” which means that once one finds himself in a dangerous situation, getting out of it can be detrimental to one’s career or aspirations, even threatening to his life. It comes from the phrase “he who rides the tiger is afraid to dismount or finds it hard to get off it.” Has Mr. Rio realized the consequence of resigning from the Duterte Cabinet for the reasons he has stated that he has decided to stay on the back of the tiger?

However, US President John F. Kennedy left words of wisdom regarding riding a tiger. On his inauguration as president, he said, “Remember that in the past those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.”

 

Oscar P. Lagman, Jr. is a retired corporate executive, business consultant, and management professor. He has been a politicized citizen since his college days in the late 1950s.

Resilience and out-of-process events

I had lunch with Gina. She was diagnosed 10 years ago at age 40 with breast cancer. Stage 3c, meaning advanced. Nineteen of the 25 lymph nodes the doctors found were malignant. She underwent surgery, six sessions of chemo, and 33 radiation sessions. Each chemo session left her sick and nauseous for a week. It left a metallic taste in her mouth, and she could not eat anything.

“What was the toughest part of all this?” I asked. “The day I found out!” she replied. “My heart fell to the floor. I cried. And cried some more. Then, it stopped there. I told myself. I already have cancer. I am not going to make it worse by feeling sorry for myself. I am going to do this. I am going to get myself well.” That is resilience.

Resilience is the ability to deal with, recover, and grow from adversity. In a corporate setting, it is the ability to deal with, recover, and grow from “out-of-process” events. Any organization has out-of-process events. These are events for which a process has not been defined. For example, an overturned bus blocking delivery vans can mean no food to sell at a fast-food outlet. This is an out-of-process event or, in our definition of resilience, the “adversity.” Resilient people, because of the way they think and behave, approach the problem to solve it. The non-resilient ones withdraw from the problem to avoid it. Company growth comes from those who habitually view out-of-process events as opportunities, and proactively step forward to solve them.

There are several drivers of resilience. One model for workplace resilience identifies four component skills: confidence, adaptability, purposefulness, and social support (Robertson, 2015).

The US Army and the University of Pennsylvania’s Positive Psychology Center have jointly designed a resilience model for the US Army Master Resilience Trainer course. This 10-day program teaches resilience skills for soldiers. The program develops six core competencies to build resilience and prepares one for adversity (Reivich and Seligman, 2011). These competencies work not only for soldiers preparing for war but also for you and me going through work and life’s troughs. The competencies are:

“(a) self-awareness — identifying one’s thoughts, emotions, and behaviors, and patterns in each that are counterproductive;

(b) self-regulation — the ability to regulate impulses, thinking, emotions, and behaviors to achieve goals, as well as the willingness and ability to express emotions;

(c) optimism — noticing the goodness in self and others, identifying what is controllable, remaining wedded to reality, and challenging counterproductive beliefs;

(d) mental agility — thinking flexibly and accurately, perspective taking, and the willingness to try new strategies;

(e) character strengths — identifying the top strengths in oneself and others, relying on one’s strengths to overcome challenges and meet goals, and cultivating a strength approach in one’s unit; and

(f) connection — building strong relationships through positive and effective communication, empathy, willingness to ask for help, and willingness to offer help” (Reivich and Seligman, 2011).

I define a resilience model with five elements. This model identifies the factors that enhance personal resilience:

1. Purposefulness — having a purpose worth pursuing makes you resilient.

2. Optimism — believing in your ability to bring about a better future outcome makes you resilient.

3. Flexibility — being able to assess challenges from different perspectives, find opportunities in them, and solve them creatively makes you resilient.

4. Self-control — being able to regulate thoughts, feelings, and behavior makes you resilient.

5. Social support — being able to rely on support from others makes you resilient.

Resilience is a trait that uniquely sets us apart from robots and their artificial intelligence algorithms. Resilient people are the ones who push an enterprise forward to deliver and grow.

Organizations should, therefore, invest in resilience-building programs. Resilience is good for people, and it is good for business.

The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines or the MAP

 

Cliff Eala is the Founder and CEO at energy efficiency firm Synerbyte Ltd. and author of the book Sh*tty Places & Selfish People: 7 Rules of Engagement which is now available online at

www.cliffeala.com/books.

cliff.eala@synerbyte.com

map@map.org.ph

http://map.org.ph

Big Data won’t save you from coronavirus

By David Fickling

HOW OFTEN do you see a piece of economic or financial information revised upward by 45%? And how reliable would you regard a data set that’s subject to such adjustments?

This is the problem confronting epidemiologists trying to make sense of the novel coronavirus spreading from China’s Hubei province. On Thursday, the tally there surged by 45% — or 14,480 cases. The revision was largely due to health authorities adding patients diagnosed on the basis of lung scans to a previous count, which was mostly limited to those whose swab tests came back positive.

The medical data emerging from hospitals and clinics around the world are invaluable in determining how this outbreak will evolve — but the picture painted by the information is changing almost as fast as the disease itself, and isn’t always of impeccable provenance. Just as novel infections exploit weaknesses in the body’s immune defenses, epidemics have an unnerving habit of spotting the vulnerabilities of the data-driven society we’ve built for ourselves.

That’s not a comforting thought. We live in an era where everything seems quantifiable, from our daily movements to our internet search habits and even our heartbeats. At a time when people are scared and seeking certainty, it’s alarming that the knowledge we have on this most important issue is at best an approximate guide to what’s happening.

“It’s so easy these days to capture data on anything, but to make meaning of it is not easy at all,” said John Carlin, a professor at the University of Melbourne specializing in medical statistics and epidemiology. “There’s genuinely a lot of uncertainty, but that’s not what people want to know. They want to know it’s under control.”

That’s most visible in the contradictory information we’re seeing around how many people have been infected, and what share of them have died. While those figures are essential for getting a handle on the situation, as we’ve argued, they’re subject to errors in sampling and measurement that are compounded in high-pressure, strained circumstances. The physical capacity to do timely testing and diagnosis can’t be taken for granted either, as my colleague Max Nisen has written.

Early case fatality rates for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome were often 40% or higher before settling down to figures in the region of 15% or less. The age of patients, whether they get sick in the community or in a hospital, and doctors’ capacity and experience in offering treatment can all affect those numbers dramatically.

Even the way that coronavirus cases are defined and counted has changed several times, said Professor Raina MacIntyre, head of the University of New South Wales’s Biosecurity Research Program: From “pneumonia of unknown cause” in the early days, through laboratory-confirmed cases once a virus was identified, to the current standard that includes lung scans. That’s a common phenomenon during outbreaks, she said.

Those problems are exacerbated by the fact that China’s government has already shown itself willing to suppress medical information for political reasons. While you’d hope the seriousness of the situation would have changed that instinct, the fact casts a shadow of doubt over everything we know.

How should the world respond amid this fog of uncertainty?

While every piece of information is subject to revision and the usual statistical rule of garbage-in, garbage-out, epidemiologists have ways to make better sense of what is going on.

Well-established statistical techniques can be used to clean up messy data. A study this week by Imperial College London used screening of passengers flying to Japan and Germany to estimate the fatality rate for all cases was about 1% — below the 2.7% of confirmed ones found in Hubei province, but higher than the 0.5% seen for the rest of the world.

When studies from different researchers using varying techniques start to converge toward common conclusions, that’s also a strong if not faultless indication that we’re on the right track. The number of new infections caused by each coronavirus case has now been identified in the region of 2.2 or 2.3 by several separate studies, for instance — although that number itself can be subject to change as people quarantine themselves and self-segregate to prevent infection.

The troubling truth, though, is that in a society that expects to know everything, this most crucial piece of knowledge is still uncertain.

Google can track my every move and tell me where I ate lunch last week, but viruses don’t carry phones. The facts about this disease are hidden in the activity of billions of nanometer-scale particles, spreading through the cells of tens of thousands of humans and the environments we traverse. Big data can barely scratch the surface of solving that problem.

 

BLOOMBERG OPINION

Badminton Asia Manila successfully concludes

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

INITIALLY in peril to get going over concerns on the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), the 2020 Badminton Asia Manila Team Championships successfully concluded its six-day run at the weekend with Indonesia and Japan retaining their respective titles.

Took place from Feb. 11 to 16 at the Rizal Memorial Coliseum, Badminton Asia Manila reached the end point with deserving winners after having to go through a redraw of groupings prior to the start of the tournament with teams like China and Hong Kong having to abandon their bids because of the COVID-19.

To date there is still a travel ban imposed on said country by the Philippine government to avert the further spread of the highly contagious respiratory disease.

Wuhan in Hubei province in China is the ground zero of COVID-19, with the disease having spread to other parts of China and the world, including the Philippines.

Indonesia and Japan ruled their respective divisions in the 2020 Badminton Asia Manila Team Championships, with the former winning its third straight men’s title and the latter taking the women’s crown anew.

Indonesia defeated regional rival Malaysia, 3-1, in the finale of the men’s joust on Sunday.

Mohammad Ahsan and Fajar Alfian powered their team to the title, clinching the match-winning set.

The two shook off Ong Yew Sin and Teo Ee Yi in the first game of the second doubles match, 21-18, before taking control of the second, 21-17, to take the tie and keep Indonesia’s place at the top of the biennial meet.

World number five player Anthony Ginting got the winning going for Indonesia but not after having made to sweat by Lee Zii Jia in the opening frame, 22-20.

He then took firmer control of the second set, winning, 21-16, to hand Indonesia a 1-0 lead.

The Indonesian tandem of Marcus Gideon and Kevin Sakamuljo made it a 2-0 lead for their squad after taking down Aaron Chia and Soh Wooi Yik, 22-20, 21-16.

Malaysia got the break in the third match care of Cheam June Wei, who shook off several title-clinching points from reigning Asian Games gold medalist Jonatan Christie, taking the deciding frame to keep Malaysia in the battle, 21-16, 17-21, 24-22.

It was short-lived though as Messrs. Ahsan and Alfian went for the closeout the following set.

The Indonesian men’s doubles tandem of Mohammad Ahsan and Fajar Alfian powered their team to the title at the Badminton Asia Manila Team Championships. — BADMINTON ASIA

“We are very happy and now we’re focused on the next Thomas Cup,” said Mr. Alfian, the second-ranked doubles player in the world, referring to the 2020 Thomas Cup in Aarhus, Denmark, later this year where they qualified for after topping the Manila team championships.

They will be joined at the Thomas Cup by runner-up Malaysia and bronze winners Japan and Korea.

The Philippines reached the quarterfinals of the men’s tournament before losing to Indonesia, 3-0.

WOMEN’S SIDE
Meanwhile, Japan sustained its dominant run on the women’s side, sweeping Korea, 3-0, in the finals earlier on Sunday.

Singles player Sayaka Takahashi stepped up once more and brought Japan its second consecutive title by stopping Sung Ji Hyun, 21-16, 21-12, in the third set, which turned out to be the final one for the match.

Former world number one player Akane Yamaguchi was first to plunge into action for Japan and encountered some trouble before holding on to win, 21-18, 19-21, 23-21, to put Japan on the board after the opening singles match.

Then Yuki Fukushima and Sayaka Hirota later fended off Lee Seo Hee and Shin Seung Chan in the lone doubles match to put the eventual champions at the 2-0 lead, 21-16, 21-16.

“I was very confident that we can be champions with this team,” Ms. Takahashi shared. Adding, “I’m happy that we became champions. It was a good experience for the next ones to come.”

Next for Japan is the 2020 Uber Cup scheduled from May 16 to 24 in Aarhus, Denmark.

It will be joined there by Korea and bronze winners Malaysia and Thailand.

The Philippine women’s team finished last in the Manila tournament but was grateful still for the opportunity to compete with some of the best teams in the world where it learned valuable lessons which it could use moving forward.

The Badminton Asia Manila Team Championships was organized by the Philippine Badminton Association and was backed by Smart Communications Inc., MVP Sports Foundation, Leisure and Resorts World Corp., Cignal and TV5.

Team LeBron beats Team Giannis 157-155

CHICAGO — Team LeBron beat Team Giannis by two points at the 69th NBA All-Star Game on Sunday at a packed United Center that fell silent for eight seconds before tip-off as about 21,000 fans joined hands to pay their respects to global sports icon Kobe Bryant.

The silence was broken by a string of thunderous “Kobe, Kobe, Kobe,” chants that rocked the stadium as the crowd honored Bryant, who wore the No. 8 and No. 24 during a 20-year career with the Los Angeles Lakers that was highlighted by five National Basketball Association championships.

The stirring pre-game tribute began with Laker great Magic Johnson rousing the crowd and paying homage to Bryant, killed along with his 13-year-old daughter Gianna and seven victims in a helicopter crash in Calabasas, California, on Jan. 26.

“We will never see another basketball player quite like Kobe,” Johnson said, highlighting his work with the Los Angeles community along with the love he had for his family. “This is a tough time for the whole NBA family.”

Johnson also paid tribute to former NBA Commissioner David Stern, who oversaw explosive growth in the popularity of the game during his 30-year tenure. Stern died on Jan. 1.

Before tip-off, the singer and actor Jennifer Hudson, who is a Chicago native, sang with a montage of photos of Bryant and his daughter in the background.

The game was a culmination of a weekend filled with tributes to the former Los Angeles Lakers star who was an 18-time All-Star and won the All-Star game’s MVP award four times.

On Friday, Bryant, who is fourth all-time in league scoring, was named a finalist to the Basketball Hall of Fame. On Saturday, the league’s commissioner, Adam Silver, announced that the league’s All-Star Game Most Valuable Player Award has been permanently named for Bryant.

Bryant made his NBA All-Star Game debut in 1998 at age 19 — the youngest player to ever play in an All-Star Game. His 18 All-Star selections are the second-most in NBA history, behind Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, at 19.

Players in Sunday’s All-Star game wore No. 2 and No. 24 on their jerseys to honor Kobe and Gianna Bryant, while the game’s format paid homage to Bryant.

The team with the most points after three quarters needed to score 24 points to win, while the trailing team had to score 24 plus the number of points it was down.

Team Giannis held a nine-point lead over Team LeBron after three quarters, but the LeBron James-led side had the last laugh, outscoring Team Giannis 33-22 in the final period to clinch a 157-155 victory.

Team Giannis was headed by Giannis Antetokounmpo of the Milwaukee Bucks.

Team LeBron’s Kawhi Leonard was named All-Star MVP after scoring 30 points, including eight three-pointers. — Reuters

Team Manila Southwoods itching for PAL Interclub redemption in Bacolod

MANILA Southwoods will go to Bacolod in two weeks thinking of one thing: Starting from scratch.

Denied a fifth straight Philippine Airlines Interclub Men’s championship last year in Cebu, the Carmona-based squad will be fielding another roster that is armed to the teeth as it tries to start off another streak and get one of the strongest programs in the country back on track.

“For us, it’s like we’re starting over again,” non-playing skipper Thirdy Escano said over the phone. “Our players know what it is we missed last year. All credit to Cebu (Country Club), don’t get me wrong, but we are going all out to get the first of another streak.”

Cebu CC, feeling right at home, pulled off the unimaginable at the PAL Interclub last year, coming from the lower-ranked Founders Division to dethrone Southwoods with fine play and scoring all week.

And Escano believes, unlike last year, that no team will have an advantage in the 72-hole unofficial team championship of the country that gets off the ground on March 4 at the Binitin and Marapara layouts.

Yuto Katsuragawa, the Japanese hotshot, returns for another tour of duty, and Escano tweaked his lineup a bit by recalling a veteran who was part of Southwoods’ early successes in Vince Lauron, the former pro who will be the team’s second anchor together with Jun Jun Plana.

“Veteran presence was what we lacked last year,” Escano said. “Bringing back Vince addresses that while also providing a lot of firepower for the team.”

Former Junior World champion Kristoffer Arevalo, Jeff Jun, Sean Ramos, Josh Jorge, Masaichi Otake, Santino Laurel and Aguri Iwasaki, who is priming up for the final stage of qualifying for the Asian Tour, are the other members of the loaded Southwoods squad.

National flag carrier Philippine Airlines is the host of this prestigious international sporting event. The platinum sponsors are Asian Air Safari, Vanguard Radio Network, Fox Networks Group, and Radio Mindanao Network, Inc.

Major sponsors include The Boeing Company, University of Mindanao Broadcasting Network, Avolon Aerospace Singapore Pte Ltd, Rolls-Royce, Manila Broadcasting Co., Primax Broadcasting, Rolls-Royce Singapore Pte Ltd, and CIGNAL TV Inc.

Other supporters are Uniglobe Travelware Co., Inc. (The Travel Club), Philippine Manila Standard Publishing Inc. (Manila Standard), Officine Corporation, GE Aviation, SEDA Hotels, BDO Unibank, Smart Communications, Inc., People Asia Magazine, A+E Networks Asia (History), and Allianz PNB Life.

TIEZA set to launch night golf at Club Intramuros Golf Course on Feb. 26

THE Department of Tourism thru its Infrastructure Arm — the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA) will be launching night golf operations at the Club Intramuros Golf Club (CIGC) on Feb. 26.

The CIGC has undergone renovation since 2018 through the initiative of TIEZA, wherein the agency has invested almost P100 million for the night golf, rehabilitation of the golf course, as well as improvements of the interiors.

The TIEZA will continue on the next phase of the rehabilitation of the CIGC, which will cover the enhancement of its Clubhouse before the end of the year, in addition to being open to a partnership with the private sector for operation and management.

CIGC is known as one of the oldest golf courses in the country and first to offer the night golf in the past. It is located along the historic walls of the Intramuros, which is approximately 20 hectares in size, full 18 holes par 66 course, with a total span of 4,326 yards.

TIEZA Chief Operating Officer Pocholo Paragas said that one of the very first initiatives of TIEZA was to “redevelop” CIGC to make it more competitive with the other golf courses in the country.

“We consider the completion of the first phase of rehabilitation and the installation of the night golf facilities, one of the major milestones of the agency as this has reaffirmed our commitment to revitalize tourist destinations through the support of tourism infrastructure,” Paragas remarked.

“It is a historic and recreational site in itself. We prioritize the rehabilitation of this because we want to attract golfers and non-golfers to visit the CIGC because it is not just a golfing facility, it is also a venue for meetings, special events, or any celebrations for families and corporate groups ” Paragas added.

A few weeks ago, internationally-acclaimed Filipino golfers Bianca Pagdanganan (gold medalist of 30th SEA Games and 2018 Asian Games), Yuka Saso (gold medalist of 2018 Asian Games), and reigning Amateur Champion Jobim Carlos (National Doubles Golf Championship, Fil-Am Invitational Golf Tournament and W-Express National Golf Amateur Golf Championship) visited the Club Intramuros to try out the newly rehabilitated golf course with its newly installed night golf facilities.

They enjoyed their experience playing in the “iconic” golf course and shared their excitement to play again with other golfers and enthusiasts.

CIGC will be opened to the public starting on Feb. 28 and every Tuesday, Friday, and Saturday thereafter. The night golf facilities will be open three times a week for resident and non-resident players, from 3:30 p.m. until 12 midnight. Last tee-off is at 7 p.m.

For more information on the schedule and the green fee rates of the Club Intramuros Golf Course, the public may contact the following numbers: 8526-1291 and 8527-6614 and look for Archieval Mazon dela Cruz, CIGC Reservation Officer. CIGC is located at Anda Circle, Bonifacio Drive, Intramuros, Manila.

Games from Gibraltar

Gibraltar Masters 2020
Caleta Hotel, Gibraltar
Jan. 21 — 30, 2020

Final Top Standings:

1 — 7. Andrey Esipenko RUS 2654, Wang Hao CHN 2758, Daniil Yuffa 2566, David Paravyan RUS 2629, Maxime Vachier-Lagrave FRA 2770, David Navara CZE 2717, Mustaf Yilmaz TUR 2607, 7.5/10

8 — 23. Parham Maghsoodloo IRI 2674, Jan Werle NED 2545, Veselin Topalov BUL 2738, Aryan Chopra IND 2562, Mikhail Kobalia RUS 2609, Murali Karthikeyan IND 2606, Michael Adams ENG 2694, Le Quang Liem VIE 2713, Gawain Jones ENG 2679, Ivan Saric CRO 2655, Krishnan Sasikiran IND 2648, Jules Moussard FRA 2600, Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa IND 2602, Bogdan-Daniel Deac ROU 2626, Tan Zhongyi CHN 2493, Daniele Vocaturo ITA 2622, 7.0/10

Total Participants: 250 players

Time Control: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, then 50 minutes for the next 20 moves followed by 15 minutes for the rest of the game with 30 seconds added to your clock after every move starting move 1

The Azeri GM Shakhriyar Mamedyarov was the top seed of the tournament but withdrew before start of play on round 8 due to illness.

Mamedyarov, born April 12, 1958, is among the best players in the world. With a current rating of 2770 he is the no. 1 in Azerbaijan and no. 8 in the world (just one slot behind Wesley So). His personal best rating of 2820 makes him the sixth-highest-rated player of all time in chess history.

Mamedyarov has competed in the Candidates Tournament in 2011 (eliminated in quarterfinals), in 2014 (placing fourth) and in 2018 (placing second). He won the World Junior Championship in 2003 (Nakchivan). There were some murmurs that many of the best juniors at the time could not take part because it was held in such a remote town within Azerbaijan. Anyway Mamedyarov wanted none of that and took part in the Istanbul 2005 Juniors, winning it again. He entered the history books as the first and only two-time World Junior Champion.

His career has been on a sort of roller-coaster trajectory. He reached the ranking of the fourth highest rated player in January 2007 (2754) and then stagnated for a while in the low 2700s before surging back up to no. 2 in the world on February 2018.

Magnus Carlsen has the longest confirmed unbeaten streak at the elite level — his record currently stands at 120 games. When was the last time he lost? That was in Biel 2018 against Shakhriyar Mamedyarov.

It is games like the following which reminded me of just how strong Mamedyarov can be so long as he focuses. I didn’t even notice it until my attention was called by John Saunders, the Press Officer of the 2020 Gibraltar Chess Festival. He is no mean player himself, having represented Wales in international competition.

John has a real gift for explaining the game and after going through his notes I finally understood what was happening, and gained a higher appreciation of the artistry of Mamedyarov. I present them now to you with his kind permission.

Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar (2770) — Gordon, Stephen J. (2504) [D38]
18th Gibraltar Masters Caleta Hotel, Gibraltar (2.1), 22.01.2020

I will turn over the analysis of the game to John Saunders on the 48th move.

Playing Black is Stephen Gordon, a 33-year old English Grandmaster. He is a former English Junior Champion and very nearly won the 2006 European Championship, finishing joint second place behind Nigel Short.

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 d5 4.Nc3 Bb4

Once again we have a Ragozin.

5.Bg5 h6 6.Bxf6 Qxf6 7.e3 0 — 0 8.Be2 dxc4 9.0 — 0

This is the point behind White’s 8.Be2 instead of the more common 8.Bd3. With the bishop on d3 White would be forced to retake the pawn on c4.

9…c5

Black can try to hold on to the pawn with 9…Bxc3 but then 10.bxc3 b5 11.a4 c6 12.Ne5 a6 13.Bf3 White’s pressure on the queenside is more than enough for the sacrificed pawn.

10.Ne4 Qe7 11.a3 cxd4 12.Qxd4

[12.axb4 d3]

12…Ba5 13.Qxc4 Bd7 14.Qc5 Nc6 15.Qxe7 Nxe7 16.Nc5 Bc6 17.Ne5 Bb6 18.Nxc6 Bxc5 19.Na5 b6 20.Nc4

White is threatening 21.b4 which wins a pawn after 21…b5 22.bxc5 bxc4 23.Rfc1.

20…Rfd8 21.b4 Bd6 22.Rac1 Nd5

Taking away the c7 — square from the white rook.

23.g3 Bf8 24.Rc2 Rac8 25.Rfc1 g6 26.e4 Nf6 27.f3 Nd7

Black has defended his position well and the position is equal. As BW readers know though equal is not the same as drawn. Shakh keeps trying.

28.Kg2 Nb8 29.f4 Rc7 30.Ne5 Rxc2 31.Rxc2 Bd6 32.Ng4 Kg7 33.e5 Be7 34.Nf2 a5 35.Rc7 Rd7 36.Rc8 Rd8 37.Rxd8 Bxd8 38.bxa5 bxa5 39.Bb5 f6 40.Nd3 Bb6 41.exf6+ Kxf6 42.a4 g5 43.Kf3 Kf5 44.h3 Bc7 45.fxg5 Kxg5 46.Nf2 Kf5 47.h4 Kf6 <D>

POSITION AFTER 47…KF6

At this stage I turn you over to John Saunders. Comment with <BA> is mine.

48.h5!?

Engines don’t care for this move, and not many humans would think to play it, but it exemplifies how imaginative (and what a high-class trickster) Mamedyarov is. The pawn looks vulnerable to capture by the black king but Mamedyarov has laced it with a long-lasting poison of such toxicity that can hardly be credited.

48…Bb6

<BA> Going for the pawn right away will backfire spectacularly: 48…Kg5? 49.Ne4+! Kxh5 (49…Kf5 50.g4+ Ke5 51.g5 hxg5 52.h6 g4+ 53.Ke3 Kf5 54.h7 Be5 55.Nd6+ Kg6 56.Bd3+ Kg7? 57.h8Q+ Kxh8 58.Nf7+ Kg7 59.Nxe5 beautiful, right?) 50.Be8# checkmate!

49.Ng4+ Kg5 50.Ne5 Bc7

Not falling for 50…Kxh5?? 51.Kf4! followed by 52.Be2 mate, which only the futile 52…Be3+ prevents. Mamedyarov is using this tactical trick to indirectly defend his h-pawn, but he’s not finished yet.

51.Ng6 e5

It’s more or less the same trap as before but with the merest hint of mate this time and in more temptingly attractive wrapping paper: 51…Kxh5? 52.Nf4+ Bxf4 53.Kxf4 — once again threatening mate in one, this time by Be8 — 53…Kg6 54.Ke5 and the white king strolls across the board unhindered to consume the stranded knight.

However, it turns out that Black has an improbable antidote here with 51…Bd6!! when 52.Nf4 Bxf4 53.gxf4+ Kxh5 54.Ke4 Kh4!! and Stockfish tells us that Black can hold. I won’t pretend for a second, I can explain why, even when led by the nose by the analysis engine, and this would be phenomenally hard for any human, let alone one as cerebrally and chronologically challenged as me, to figure out over the board. (54…Kg4 doesn’t work because of 55.Bc4!!, apparently, but once again it’s too far above my pay grade to explain why)

52.Ke4 Kg4

The poison is still active: 52…Kxh5?? 53.Kf5 wins.

53.Nxe5+ Kxg3

[53…Kg5 probably only postpones dinner. The g3 — pawn is poisonous too, of course, and practically has a skull and crossbones etched into it, but Black probably wanted to end his suffering]

54.Kf5!

The only move to win, but now the air has cleared a little, it is not quite so hard to find.

54…Kh4 55.Ng6+! 1 — 0

One final offer of the deadly h-pawn is spurned and instead Black resigned. The black king is forced away from the action. 55…Kg3 (55…Kxh5? 56.Be2#) 56.Nh8! — an unusual situation where a knight going into a corner is the best move — 56…Kh4 57.Kg6 and suddenly it all becomes obvious how the knight will snaffle the h6 — pawn and the white h-pawn will have a clear run through to promote or win the bishop.

I love this ending because it also brought back memories of a less complicated time many many years ago when I was still in the elementary level of Xavier School. One day I discovered the book One Hundred Selected Games by the 6th world chess champion Mikhail Botvinnik.

He wrote about a game he played against the Leningrad first category player (roughly equivalent to our candidate master) Liutov in the winter of 1925. The notes below are Botvinnik’s:

Liutov — Botvinnik, Mikhail Leningrad, 1925
[Botvinnik, M.]

<Black to play>

In the position shown on the diagram, Black has two extra pawns and a strong attack, as against White’s extra knight. Play went:

1…h5! 2.Qxh5

A loss follows both

2.g4 hxg4+ 3.Qxg4 Qh1+ 4.Kg3 Qe1+;

2.Qb7+ Kh6 and there is no defense against g5 — g4+.

2…Qh1+ 3.Kg4 Qd1+ 4.Nf3 Qd7# 0-1

The end was so unexpected that for a moment my opponent did not notice that the game was over.

Well, the mating finish stunned me as well — — I had no inkling that it was coming. For some reason Mamedyarov’s “trick” brought me back to the day when I saw the Botvinnik mate. The beauty of chess I discovered on that day is still there today.

We will take up a few more games on Thursday before leaving Gibraltar.

 

Bobby Ang is a founding member of the National Chess Federation of the Philippines (NCFP) and its first Executive Director. A Certified Public Accountant (CPA), he taught accounting in the University of Santo Tomas (UST) for 25 years and is currently Chief Audit Executive of the Equicom Group of Companies.

bobby@cpamd.net

The old Tiger

There was a time when Tiger Woods would have been so ticked off by a poor round to the point of frustration. He would have headed straight to the range to correct his swing, striving to let the dark be his light in order to prep for the immediate future. Continuous improvement was his mantra, never mind the stakes, never mind the circumstances. The high number he just shot occupying his mind, he would have tried to scratch an itch in the belief that a remedy was in store. Then, he insisted that a remedy was always in store; it was just a matter of finding the right one.

That Tiger Woods is no longer around these days. He has been replaced by a more mature, more experienced, and, therefore, more considerate version who has learned the value of acceptance. The effects of multiple injuries and surgeries, including a serious flirtation with forced retirement, have mellowed him considerably. And, given his advancing age, he understands that he will not always be at his best. In fact, he will be far from it often — derailed by factors that used to be extraneous. Plenty can get him now. The cold. Or an unexplained stiffness. Or a mood swing. Or a family obligation. Any and all reasons that he used to chuck by the wayside in pursuit of success.

Which, for all intents, was why Woods proved mostly resigned to his plight yesterday. He appeared irked when he shot 73 two days prior, and not simply because he stood as host of the Genesis Invitational. After progressively hitting new lows to his current campaign, however, irritation was replaced by forbearance. He greeted the weekend with fatigue, and he went away with a 74 and a 77 for his efforts. He still displayed his usual focus with and in every shot, but skill failed to accompany will — because he was older. Because he was just plain old.

Interestingly, Woods declared his desire to further prune his commitments in the aftermath. His aim, he said, was to compete in a mere 12 tournaments through a given season. He wants to preserve his energy, and, by extension, himself. It’s why he won’t be at the Mexico Championship this week, the lure and allure of participating in a no-cut, limited-field event in order to gain crucial world rankings points for an Olympic berth notwithstanding. And it’s why his schedule heading into the Masters isn’t a lock as yet. How he feels prior to committing is crucial.

One thing’s sure, though: Woods will get up for the tournaments he cares for the most. He’ll leave nothing in the tank for the majors. He’ll be dead set on defending his title at Augusta in April, on contending at Harding Park in May, on doing better at Winged Foot in June, and on turning his acquaintance with Royal St. George’s into victory in July. At 44, he’ll be hoping for his best. And, at 44, he’ll need no small measure of luck to brandish it.

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994. He is a consultant on strategic planning, operations and Human Resources management, corporate communications, and business development.

Infected Pinoys in cruise ship now at 27 — DFA

THE number of Filipinos aboard a cruise ship who tested positive for the new coronavirus strain has risen to 27, according to the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA).

The number included 16 new cases confirmed on Saturday, all of whom were crew members of the Diamond Princess cruise ship docked in Yokohama, the agency said in a statement on Monday.

The virus has killed more than 1,700 people and sickened about 70,000 more, mostly in China, according to country’s National Health Commission.

The Japanese Health Ministry had said all crew and passengers on board would be tested starting yesterday, DFA said. Test results would become available by the time the ship’s quarantine period ends, it added.

The Japanese government announced 70 new confirmed cases on Sunday, which did not include any Filipinos. The quarantine period will end on Feb. 19.

DFA said an inter-agency task force for the management of emerging infectious diseases was set to meet on Monday to determine the Philippine government’s next action concerning Filipinos aboard the cruise ship.

“Certainly, we will assist all the Filipinos who are currently in Yokohama,” Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Eduardo Martin R. Meñez said at a briefing at the presidential palace.

Any moves would be coordinated and would need clearance from the Japanese government, he added.

The cruise ship has about 3,700 passengers and crew members, 538 of whom are Filipinos.

Countries including the United States, Italy and South Korea have moved to repatriate their nationals quarantined in cruise ship.

Meanwhile, the Department of Health (DoH) said 350 of almost 500 people under investigation for the new coronavirus strain had been discharged.

The agency said 171 people were still confined in hospitals and were being monitored.

DoH said 453 people had tested negative for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Confirmed cases remained at three, while the test results for 22 more were pending.

Health Secretary Francisco T. Duque III traced the decreasing trend to the agency’s strengthened surveillance, assessment and management interventions.

“Although we see a decreasing trend, the department will not be complacent and will be more vigilant as we brace for the possibility of local transmission in our country,” he said in a statement.

The Philippines imposed a travel ban on foreigners coming from China, Hong Kong and Macau. — Charmaine A. Tadalan and Gillian M. Cortez