Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 9670

It’s still hard to predict who will die from COVID-19

In every epidemic, some die, others become ill and recover, and the luckiest live through infection without symptoms. In today’s pandemic, we are seeing this play out before our eyes. Although the initial epidemiological data show that COVID-19 is more severe in older people, men, and those with pre-existing conditions such as heart and lung disease, not everyone with severe disease has these risk factors. And not everyone at risk has the same symptoms, prognosis or outcome.

Why do people manifest such differences? And why is it not possible to predict an individual’s experience? To address this complex question, it is important to first get our terminology right. “Infection” means acquisition of the coronavirus after exposure to it. Infection is not synonymous with exposure — or with disease. Disease is a clinical state associated with cough, fever, and other symptoms that ranges from mild to severe. These symptoms arise from damage to tissues and the immune system. Death occurs when there is so much damage that the body cannot maintain blood oxygenation and other necessary functions.

In past epidemics, death and survival were attributed to providence or fortune. Modern medicine and science provide a better understanding of why infection can lead to such different outcomes. Among individuals in the same risk group — the same age, say — differences in infection outcome can result from five different variables outside their control.

The first of these is microbial dosage or inoculum, the number of viral particles that cause infection. Small numbers of viral particles are more likely to be contained effectively by the body’s defenses. Then, infection may cause no symptoms or only mild disease. In contrast, a large number of particles can lead to increased viral growth, overwhelming the immune system and causing more severe disease.

Genetics may also influence susceptibility to severe infection. Viruses often gain access to host cells via surface proteins, which vary in presence and nature from person to person. Someone with no such surface proteins may be resistant to infection. In the case of HIV, for example, some people lack the receptors needed for viral infection and are not susceptible to the virus.

A third variable that influences infection outcome is the route by which a virus enters the body. It’s possible that virus inhaled in the form of aerosolized droplets triggers different immune defenses than does virus acquired by touching contaminated surfaces and then touching one’s face. The nose and the lung differ in local defenses, so the route of infection could significantly affect the outcome.

The fourth variable is the strength of the coronavirus itself. Viruses differ in virulence — their capacity to damage host tissues or immunity — even when they are all the same species. This is why flu seasons vary in severity from year to year. The varieties of a virus such as coronavirus differ depending on small genetic characteristics and how these affect the interaction with human hosts. As the coronavirus spreads from person to person, it may undergo unique changes in its genetic structure that enhance or attenuate its capacity to do harm. Strains that are more virulent could lead to more severe disease.

Finally, people’s immune status — especially their history of prior infectious diseases — crucially determines how they respond to a new infection. The immune system remembers previous encounters with microbes, and that affects how it fights and responds to new ones. In the case of dengue, infection with one type of the virus can make the individual more susceptible to infection with a different type of the same virus. In other situations, a recent infection with a virus can affect susceptibility to an unrelated new infection. For example, having had the flu before coronavirus infection could change the course of COVID-19 disease in unpredictable ways. When a person’s immune system has no memory of an infectious agent, it may be unable to rapidly respond, and this may allow the invader to escape detection, giving it more time to cause damage.

Taken together, these variables create a complex picture. The amount of virus, our genes, the route of infection, the variety of the virus, and our immunological history combine to produce outcomes ranging from asymptomatic infection to death. And because these parameters can vary so much from infected person to infected person, it’s impossible to predict who will live and who will die. Therefore, despite accumulating evidence that most who acquire the coronavirus will not develop severe disease, the uncertainty of who is at grave risk enhances the pandemic’s terror.

In this regard, today’s situation is similar to past pandemics in which the matter of who would live and who would die was also mysterious — and led people to attribute outcomes to fortune or supernatural intervention. However, COVID-19 is different from the 1918 flu, in that today a robust scientific establishment can quickly analyze what’s happening and help figure out how best to prevent and treat infections. Science is humanity’s lifeline. In the days ahead, physicians, scientists, epidemiologists, and many more will work hard to understand individual susceptibility to coronavirus. The COVID-19 pandemic will teach us a great deal of new science that will make us better prepared for the next outbreak.

Preserving the fabric of the Philippine economy

The President just extended the Luzon-wide quarantine to April 30. This is necessary to protect public health. Now, social and economic policies must accompany it to ensure its sustainability.

Much of the public and private efforts thus far have been directed toward fortifying the fragile safety net that most vulnerable households rely on. To be sure, these initiatives are a first-order concern. But even as we attempt to save lives, we must also save livelihoods.

The enhanced community quarantine (ECQ) has made it impossible for many entrepreneurs to sustain their businesses and pay their workers. Yet there is little indication that adequate relief is forthcoming for micro-, small-, and medium-scale enterprises (MSMEs). There are 250,000 MSMEs in Metro Manila alone, and they generate close to 3 million jobs. These enterprises are responsible for the majority of the economy’s output. Without a plan to save them, millions of Filipinos will lose their livelihoods. With this job destruction will go business knowledge and processes that form the fabric of the Philippine economy.

On March 22, faculty members from the UP School of Economics and I released our plan (“A Social Protection and Economic Recovery Plan”) for how the government can contain the public health crisis while ensuring that there is still an economy to restart when we come out the other side.

A key component of the plan is for the government to provide financial assistance to businesses to preserve jobs.

Recently, the Department of Labor and Employment rolled out the COVID-19 Adjustment Measures Program (CAMP). Those who qualify for the P5,000 cash assistance are workers forced into flexible working arrangements and those who currently do not have work because of a temporary business closure. So far, 200,000 workers — of which 80,000 are in the informal sector — received direct financial aid totaling P622 million. More will certainly be required.

This will save many jobs, but not all. Businesses have non-payroll obligations, too, such as rent. What would be more effective is for the government to subsidize revenue losses proportional to how many workers are laid off. The subsidy can take the form of government-backed bank loans to facilitate the movement of cash into the hands of targeted businesses and their employees. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) can take on the default risk of these loans to encourage banks to lend money. After all, the BSP has already relaxed its capital adequacy requirements to encourage banks to part with their cash. In this sense, private financial institutions are merely serving as conduits for what is essentially government aid.

There are several advantages to this approach. One, it ensures business continuity: it will allow owners to pay their workers while also meeting their non-payroll obligations. Two, the administration will be borne by banks which are best-equipped to handle business loan applications. Three, the government will only have to deal with several hundred banks instead of up to a million MSMEs.

Over the weekend (April 4–5), the National Economic and Development Authority and the Department of Finance released a survey to seek input from consumers and businesses. This is laudable, but we did not need a survey to understand that the problem is a liquidity gap for both businesses and households.

Entrepreneurs have closed up shop and laid off workers even as the ECQ had just started. With the signing of the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act, the government took a step in the right direction. The scale of the powers given to the Chief Executive acknowledges the severity of the problem. But the government needs to act much faster than it already has at a scale that the unprecedented economic crisis demands.

 

Alfredo Paloyo is a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the University of Wollongong, Australia.

Twitter: @AlfredoPaloyo.

Messing with IP rules may affect COVID-19 response

With around a third of the world’s population in lockdown, humanity desperately needs new treatments to turn the tide against COVID-19. Our hopes depend on sensible coordination between the government and private sector. 

Government and the private sector have essential roles to play. With irreplaceable expertise in practical research, clinical trials, manufacturing and distribution, the private sector knows how to take treatments from lab to bedside.

Public sector leadership, meanwhile, can direct resources where they are most needed, clearing obstacles and coordinating efforts. 

Globally, researchers are racing to develop technologies to keep people out of intensive care and allow health systems to cope. Their tireless efforts fuel hopes of a treatment to ease the worst symptoms within weeks, and a vaccine within 18 months. 

The private sector is rising to this Herculean research and development effort. At least 20 companies are conducting clinical trials of potential treatments, with a further six racing to be the first to find a vaccine.

Many governments are working to quickly clear the approval path for desperately needed treatments. Brazil is removing regulatory bottlenecks by relying on approvals for medicines in other major markets. We hope other countries will follow.

Crucially, public health authorities are collecting data, sharing vital information, and directing treatments where they are most needed.

Public-private coordination will give us a fighting chance. 

But campaigning by health NGOs such as Médecins Sans Frontières and the UN-funded South Centre is pressuring governments into drastic action. They are calling for new legislation to pre-emptively confiscate the intellectual property (IP) of any coronavirus treatment yet to be invented, in the hope that treatment will be free for all.

This short-sightedness has struck already. Canada, Chile, Ecuador, and Israel have already moved to suspend IP rights such as patents for new COVID-19 treatments with others set to follow. The Philippines may follow. 

Crisis demands extraordinary efforts, but these populist proposals risk undermining the global system for developing and delivering urgent treatments.

For instance, drug makers must spend millions to ramp up manufacture for any new treatment. Yet this is fraught with commercial risk. Kenneth Kaitin, director of the Tufts Center for the study of drug development, says: “You don’t want to invest a lot in manufacturing before you know you are going to have a drug on the market. [Yet] you want to make sure you can manufacture as much as needed, perhaps hundreds of thousands of doses at the end of the day.” 

IP rights enable firms to mobilise the money for these massive manufacturing and supply chain investments and manage that risk. 

IP is also vital to turning a promising idea into a real treatment. Dr. Derrick Rossi is the founder of Moderna, a young biotech company that brought the first potential COVID-19 vaccine to clinical trials in record time. We asked him recently if the government could replace the private sector in bringing treatments to patients. His response: “not a chance.” 

Funding basic research is key, but just the start. “Academics are good at academia and fundamental science. They are not good at developing drugs for patients,” says Dr. Rossi. Nor do governments have the expertise, facilities, or resources to take a new treatment to market, and they usually cannot tolerate the risk of losing massive amounts of money on treatments that often don’t work out. 

The existence of IP rights has enabled a rapid response to COVID-19 by the private sector. Companies are looking afresh at old drugs in their patent portfolios that never made it. Others are investigating repurposing existing medicines for other diseases. Short term, they offer the best hope of an effective COVID-19 treatment. 

IP rights have not stood in the way so far. The UK will shortly make available millions of new antibody tests at minimal cost. Investigations continue into the usefulness of chloroquine, a malaria drug whose patent has long expired. A promising HIV drug has been licensed for global generic production by its US owner. And many of the other existing drugs that are being repurposed for COVID-19 are off-patent. 

The private sector is mobilizing not for their share prices, but because it’s the right thing to do. But removing IP rights will only inject uncertainty into an already difficult picture.

 Technology will play the key role in allowing us to get back to our normal lives. But globally, we need governments to lead and not get distracted by counterproductive ideas. 

Prof. Mark Schultz is the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company Chair in Intellectual Property Law, University of Akron School of Law. Philip Stevens is Executive Director of the Geneva Network. 

How COVID-19 is shaking up the moral universe

The epidemic forces everyone to confront deep questions of human existence, questions so profound that they have previously been answered, in many different ways, by the greatest philosophers. It’s a test of where all humans stand.

The coronavirus pandemic is a test. It’s a test of medical capacity and political will. It’s a test of endurance and forbearance, for believers a test of religious faith. It’s a test, too, of a different kind of faith, in the strength of the ideas humans choose to help them form moral judgments and guide personal and social behavior.

The epidemic forces everyone to confront deep questions of human existence, questions so profound that they have previously been answered, in many different ways, by the greatest philosophers. It’s a test of where all humans stand.

What is right and what is wrong? What can individuals expect from society, and what can society expect of them? Should others make sacrifices for me, and vice versa? Is it just to set economic limits to fighting a deadly disease?

The lieutenant governor of Texas thinks that those over 70 “shouldn’t sacrifice the country” by shutting down economic activity, but should instead be ready to sacrifice themselves. A 22-year-old partying on Spring break in Florida becomes a social media sensation with a different critique of social distancing, saying, “If I get corona, I get corona.” Consciously or not, both men are placing themselves in distinct moral traditions.

Several philosophies of social justice have claimed wide adherence in the modern world. They do not line up neatly with party political labels, and most people have sympathy for more than one. Here is a guide to some of the leading idea systems undergirding competing conceptions of right and wrong. Each is being put to the test. As you are put to the test, which do you choose?

RAWLSIANS

Many westerners are Rawlsians without knowing it. Fifty years ago, the Harvard philosopher John Rawls tried to work out how people would construct their society if the choice had to be made behind what he called a “veil of ignorance” about whether they will be rich, poor, or somewhere in-between. Faced with the risk of being the worst off, Rawls posited, humans would not demand total equality, but would need to be assured of the trappings of a modern welfare state. The assurance of basic necessities and the opportunity to do better would form the foundation for social and political justice and provide the ability for people to assert themselves.

Rawls’s monumental 1971 book, A Theory of Justice, is now regarded as the clearest moral and intellectual justification for modern center-left mixed economies. But the idea comes from somewhere deeper. Rawls was not religious, but his philosophy is essentially in line with the golden rule handed down by the Old Testament prophets and by Jesus, that we should do as we would want to be done by. Some religious leaders have approached the awful dilemmas presented by the coronavirus just as Rawls would, by taking treatment of the worst off as the criterion for social action.

“I hope the lessons we take from our country’s experience with COVID-19 aren’t about food or avoiding the spread of germs,” wrote Russell Moore, the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention in the New York Times, “but about how we treat the most vulnerable among us. A pandemic is no time to turn our eyes away from the sanctity of human life.”

Pope Francis also invoked sympathy for the most afflicted as he addressed a prayer to an empty St. Peter’s Square. “We have realized that we are on the same boat, all of us fragile and disoriented, but at the same time important and needed, all of us called to row together, each of us in need of comforting the other,” he said.

Perhaps because of their religious resonance, Rawlsian ideas have guided the approach to the pandemic chosen by authorities in the western world. Societies are mobilizing, and governments are taking extra powers to mandate claustrophobic lockdowns in a bid to minimize the death and suffering of the weakest.

Even those who aren’t religious tend to accept the logic of the veil of ignorance. If a person is unwilling to be abandoned, governments are not entitled to give up on them; they must do their best to protect everyone, particularly the weakest.

UTILITARIANS

Other philosophies produce very different ways of dealing with the epidemic. Under utilitarianism, most associated with the 19th-century British philosopher John Stuart Mill, rulers must be guided to the total happiness, or “utility,” of all the people, and should aim to secure “the greatest good for the greatest number.”

In Victorian Britain, this was a radical creed, and the first utilitarians were passionate liberal reformers. But the utilitarian calculus opens up a new possibility — that in situations such as a pandemic, some people might justly be sacrificed for the greater good. It would benefit society to accept casualties, the argument goes, to minimize disruption.

Explicit utilitarian thinking still seems beyond the pale. When Britain’s Sunday Times reported that Dominic Cummings, chief adviser to Prime Minister Boris Johnson, had advocated in private meetings a policy of letting enough people get sick to establish nationwide “herd immunity, protect the economy, and if that means some pensioners die, too bad,” it caused an outcry and met with an immediate and impassioned denial by Downing Street. Even Cummings, an iconoclast, refused to be attached to such brutally utilitarian ideas.

Mill himself would not have advocated putting money ahead of people’s lives, but a utilitarian calculus is not about balancing money and life. If a recession could lead to shorter lives and widespread misery, it is possible that making less of an attempt to save every last life from the pandemic now could lead to greater total happiness.

In the UK, a paper by an academic at the University of Bristol used mathematical techniques developed to measure the cost-efficiency of safety measures in the nuclear power industry to calculate the likely savings of human life by different approaches to the virus, and found that a 12-month lockdown followed by vaccinations would be best. But it cautioned that this would only create a net saving of life if the reduction in gross domestic product could be kept to 6.4% or less.

That paper, broadcast on the BBC, provoked a fiery response from economists, and some research suggests counterintuitively that recessions lengthen lives. Most people find the mere attempt at such an exercise callous, but it’s difficult to dismiss it. Governments and insurers do indeed put a notional price on a human life when setting policy. Must every last patient be given the utmost care if this plan of action causes greater suffering in the long run? Or, as President Donald Trump put it: “We can’t have the cure be worse than the problem.”

It’s intuitive to view moral problems through a utilitarian lens and then to find outcomes like this distasteful, and to reject them because they conflict with the golden rule. If the lockdowns drag on for months, utilitarian ideas may bubble back to the surface.

LIBERTARIANS

The libertarian place in American thought is long and distinguished. Its lineage goes back at least to the Enlightenment philosopher John Locke and the founding fathers, and in its modern incarnation gains inspiration from the author Ayn Rand, who outlined her ideas in novels and essays. For her, man had a right “to live for himself” and an individual’s happiness “cannot be prescribed by another man or any number of other men.”

The most famous libertarian thought experiment was conducted by another Harvard philosopher, Robert Nozick, in a riposte to Rawls. He imagined what kind of political state would be built, and how much personal liberty citizens would surrender, if everyone were dropped into a utopian landscape with no social structures. The novelist William Golding gave one answer in The Lord of the Flies. To avoid the descent into violence that the schoolboys of Golding’s novel endure, Nozick, in Anarchy, State and Utopia, reckoned that people would set up a very limited state dedicated to self-defense and the protection of individual rights — but nothing more.

The western coronavirus response has hugely expanded state powers and limited individual rights with little debate, and to date populations have consented to privations that Rand and Nozick argued they should never accept.

But wait. There have been objections to lockdowns on the libertarian basis that they infringe on rights. Critiques are appearing saying that politicians haven’t proven that such drastic measures are necessary. Before the coronavirus, the US suffered a measles epidemic as the result of anti-vaccination activism, a libertarian cause that put parents’ right to choose not to vaccinate their children above the state’s attempt to defend other parents’ right to expect that their own children wouldn’t have to mix with unvaccinated peers. Panic buying, and hoarding of medical equipment also show that many people are following Rand’s idea of self-determination and putting themselves first. Such ideas may grow more appealing after a few more weeks of self-isolation.

In public spaces around the world, libertarians are in conflict with the state. Social media is full of images of big social gatherings, often in luxurious social settings. “If I get corona, I get corona,” as the 22-year-old said on video in Florida. “At the end of the day, I’m not gonna let it stop me from partying.” Oklahoma’s governor even felt the need to tweet that he was at a packed restaurant.

Libertarians are not only found on the political right. As the crisis began to unfold, the American Civil Liberties Union made a statement accepting that civil liberties must “sometimes” give way when it comes to fighting a communicable disease — but “only in ways that are scientifically justified.” It said, “The evidence is clear that travel bans and quarantines are not the solution.”

The right to walk in a park looks like a flash point. In March, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo was furious to see crowds expressing libertarian sympathies — whether they saw it that way or not — by gathering in parks. “It’s arrogant,” Governor Cuomo said. “It’s self-destructive. It’s disrespectful to other people. And it has to stop and it has to stop now!”

New Yorkers started organizing to keep the parks open.

In these conditions, individual choices become freighted with moral significance. How, for example, will society eventually judge behavior like that of Kentucky Senator Rand Paul? Arguably the most prominent libertarian in the US, he continued to socialize as normal for a week after being told that he had had contact with someone who tested positive for the coronavirus. He had no symptoms. Recall that there are many elderly members of the Senate. Then, after a workout in the Senate gym, he discovered that he had himself tested positive.

COMMUNITARIANS

Yet another approach is based on the notion that everyone derives their identity from the broader community. Individual rights count, but not more than community norms. These notions go back to the Greeks, but in modern times, the philosophy is most widely connected to the sociologist Amitai Etzioni and philosopher Michael Sandel. Sandel’s Liberalism and the Limits of Justice is another riposte to Rawls, arguing that justice cannot be determined in a vacuum or behind a veil of ignorance, but must be rooted in society. He sets out a theory of justice based on the common good.

Speaking to Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, Sandel said: “The common good is about how we live together in community. It’s about the ethical ideals we strive for together, the benefits and burdens we share, the sacrifices we make for one another. It’s about the lessons we learn from one another about how to live a good and decent life.”

The virus has attacked in exactly this place, depriving everyone of life in a community. And communitarian ideas are showing themselves. Across Europe, people on lockdown have arranged to go to their windows and balconies to applaud their national health services. These are seen as bedrocks of society. At London’s Olympic opening ceremony in 2012, a pageant of Britishness, the organizers celebrated the National Health Service with dancing nurses wheeling hospital beds. For many countries with a modern welfare state, celebrating and supporting the workers of their public-health service is seen as a communitarian duty.

This is a critical point of difference with the US, where the expansion of medical care is a hugely contentious issue. Communitarians like Princeton’s Michael Walzer argue that any system of medical provision requires “the constraint of the guild of physicians.” The coronavirus promises to bring this debate to a head.

Communitarianism also underlies much social conservative thought. When the very conservative Republican Texas Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick said on Fox News that the rest of the country should not sacrifice itself for the elderly, he was making a communitarian argument, not a utilitarian one.

“No one reached out to me and said, ‘As a senior citizen, are you willing to take a chance on your survival in exchange for keeping the America that all America loves for your children and grandchildren?’” Patrick, who is 63, told the host Tucker Carlson. “And if that’s the exchange, I’m all in.”

In this telling, it is the patriotic duty of the elderly not to force privations on their country, and make life worse for their grandchildren. Such a communitarian ethic has always resonated within the US (just read Alexis de Tocqueville), and it provoked an outcry on social media.

China practiced another kind of communitarianism after the coronavirus first appeared in Wuhan in January. The people of that city were told to lock themselves in, and often forcibly quarantined, for the good of the community and the state, largely identified with the Communist Party. Under Xi Jinping, the Party has rehabilitated the Confucian thought that long justified obedience to a hierarchical and authoritarian but benevolent state. That the notion of social solidarity remains strong showed in the spectacular discipline with which China and other Asian nations dealt with the problem.

‘WE ARE ALL RAWLSIANS NOW’

For now, the approach being adopted across the West is Rawlsian. Politicians are working on the assumption that they have a duty to protect everyone as they themselves would wish to be protected, while people are also applying the golden rule as they decide that they should self-isolate for the sake of others. We are all Rawlsians now.

How long will we stay that way? All the other theories of justice have an appeal, and may test the resolve to follow the golden rule. But I suspect that Rawls and the golden rule will win out. That is partly because religion — even if it is in decline in the West — has hard-wired it into our consciousness. And as the epidemic grows worse and brings the disease within fewer degrees of separation for everyone, we may well find that the notion of loving thy neighbor as thyself becomes far more potent.

DICT warns vs security risks of using video, teleconferencing applications

THE DEPARTMENT of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) reminded the public to take measures to be safe in using video and teleconferencing applications amid security issues that have emerged recently.

“Video and Teleconferencing software and tools are now being widely used by millions of Filipinos for work, as the enhanced community quarantine is imposed by the Philippine Government,” the DICT said in an advisory on Tuesday.

“However, a number of security issues have recently surfaced for certain Video and Teleconferencing Applications, including allegations regarding the activation of the device’s video camera without the user knowing,” it added.

The department’s cybersecurity bureau, for its part, urged users to “take appropriate steps to be more cybersafe and secure” in using such applications.

It said a user can set up his meeting as private, and he should not share or announce his meeting ID number on social media or messaging platforms. He can also secure his meetings with passwords.

The host should also be notified when people join, and he should carefully inspect the list of participants periodically.

Other suggestions are to carefully control screen sharing and recording; keep camera and mic turned off unless needed; and be aware of everything that’s within view of the camera.

The DICT also advised users to install firewall software from trusted firewall security companies and free browser extensions that block tracking activities of applications such as Chrome’s AdBlock Plus and Firefox Ad Hacker.

“When not in use, cover your webcam as some hackers have the capability to turn it on without you knowing,” the department added. — A.L. Balinbin

Free access to e-learning tools offered

SECURITY BANK Corp. has partnered with Singapore-based e-learning platform 88Tuition to provide free access to its learning programs until June 30 for Filipino students who are not able to attend school due to the enhanced community quarantine.

“We wanted to support our employees and clients whose children’s learning environment had been disrupted. This is our way of supporting them while keeping them safe,” Security Bank told BusinessWorld in an e-mail interview.

“88Tuition is a reputable partner and has captured the Singapore market… The curriculum content is parallel with that of our local curriculum. 88Tuition has carefully selected the instructors. They are some of the best teachers in Singapore,” the company said.

Since announcing the program a few days ago, Security Bank reported they had “close to 300 sign-ups” in three days.

The free access allows families and their children “personalized home-based education” via 88Tuition’s content library with subjects including Science, Math, English, and Chinese suitable for students from Grade 1 to Grade 10.

“[The learning] videos [are] created by some of the best teachers in Singapore, that will help them continue and enrich their learning during this period of interruption in their regular classes. It simulates a normal class routine and provides homework through an easy dashboard that parents can access,” Security Bank said in a statement.

Security Bank is also reviewing “other ways to partner” with 88Tuition once the quarantine ends. Singaporean multinational bank, DBS, is currently a partner of 88Tuition and offers discounted rates for its members.
To sign-up for the free e-learning program and for more information, visit https://www.88tuition.com/securitybank. — ZBC

Import incentives under the Bayanihan Act

Like many countries, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed most of the cities and provinces in the Philippines under quarantine to restrict the movement of people. While quarantine is being enforced to contain the spread of the disease, it also limits the movement of essential workers and slows down the flow of critical goods needed to address the situation.

To tackle the crisis, Republic Act no. 11469 or the Bayanihan to Heal As One Act was passed, declaring a state of public health emergency throughout the country. Among its key provisions are tax exemptions for importation of health care equipment and supplies; and adopting measures that minimize the disruption of supply chains to ensure the availability of essential goods.

Easing taxes and permits

The Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) and the Bureau of Customs (BoC) issued their respective guidelines on exemptions from customs duties, VAT, and excise tax, as applicable, of imported supplies and equipment. Both Revenue Regulations (RR) 6-2020 and Customs Administrative Order (CAO) 7-2020 are effective during the three-month implementation of the RA, which may be extended by Congress.

Both regulations release importers from tax liabilities when importing goods such as personal protective equipment (PPE) like gloves, gowns, masks, goggles, face shields, surgical equipment and supplies; laboratory equipment and its reagents and maintenance; medical equipment and devices; consumables such as alcohol, sanitizers, tissue, thermometers, hand soap, detergent, sodium hypochlorite, cleaning materials, povidone iodine; common medicines in tablet and suspension form like paracetamol, mefenamic acid, vitamins, hyoscine, oral hydration solution and cetirizine; and COVID-19 testing kits and others identified by the Department of Health. The exemption applies whether the goods are imported for donation or commercial purposes.

In addition, manufacturers of health-related equipment and supplies are given the same tax and duty exemption on imported materials used for production, provided that the company is registered with any government incentive promotion agencies or included in the master list of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI).

RR 6-2020 further exempts imported donated goods intended for the national government or its agencies from donor’s tax and relaxes the requirements for a permit called Authority to Release Imported Goods (ATRIG) to facilitate fast clearance of goods from customs.

As stipulated in CAO 7-2020, the tax and duty exemptions can be availed of by securing the appropriate endorsement from the Department of Finance (DoF). Given that the DoF endorsement will take time to secure, the BoC is allowing the filing of a Provisional Goods Declaration (PGD) to immediately clear goods while the exemption endorsement is in process. The importer is required to submit the endorsement after the quarantine period.

The BoC also waived its requirement to present a certificate of product registration (CPR) from the Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) prior to the clearance of regulated products. Effectively, shipments containing donations of PPEs, ventilators, respirators and its accessories for treatment of COVID-19 patients, and face mask importation of private companies for their own use will be cleared by the BoC without a CPR.

The same applies for commercial importation of medical equipment and supplies, except that the importer will have to produce a license to operate (LTO) from the FDA and proof of pending application for CPR. Importers of ventilators, respirators, and their respective accessories for commercial purposes will only need to provide a copy of their LTO.

Expediting clearance and movement of containers

Another memorandum was jointly signed by the secretaries of the DoF, the Department of Agriculture (DA), and the DTI on April 2 to facilitate the immediate customs clearance and improve the flow of containerized cargoes of essential goods. Joint Administrative Order (JAO) 20-01 was immediately made effective to prioritize the clearance and movement of shipments containing food, medicine, and medical and basic goods.

Since food and medical supplies are regulated, the agencies under the DA and the FDA cut the processing time of applications for import permits to three working days to reduce the time spent in the preparation of documents for customs clearance.

The BoC also reduced its clearance processing time to effect immediate release containers from port terminals. To do this, importers must file goods declarations to the BoC within two days from the arrival of goods. For imported goods enclosed in a refrigerated container, the declaration can be filed prior to its arrival. In return, the BoC will complete its assessment within 24 hours. The importer is expected to pay import taxes within 24 hours from the issuance of the BoC’s tax assessment. After the payment of taxes, importers have three days to claim the goods from customs warehouses or container terminal yards.

It appears that the government has rolled out policies to ensure that the people will be provided with what they need at this time. COVID-19 shall pass. After this trying time, perhaps we will come out from isolation as better people with better systems in place.

 

The views or opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of PricewaterhouseCoopers WMS Pte. Ltd. — Philippine Branch. The content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for specific advice.

Luningning M. Pizarra is a Manager at the Worldtrade Management Services of PricewaterhouseCoopers WMS Pte. Ltd. — Philippine Branch.
+63 (2) 459 2005
luningning.m.pizarra@pwc.com

First Shoshin builds JoJoCare telehealth app for online care services

The whole country is met by unprecedented events due to the COVID-19 crisis which has drastically changed the way we go about our daily lives. Among these changes: How do you consult doctors about your health concerns without violating quarantine protocols and without exposing yourself to the risk of getting infected if you do get a chance to go out?

This is the driving force behind First Shoshin Holdings’ (FSH) $1M investment into JoJoCare, a new venture under the JoJo brand described as a holistic self-care app that helps grant people access a diverse selection of healthcare and wellness professionals without leaving their home.

Coping with the COVID-19 crisis through digital means

Just as people have begun to shift towards tools like Zoom to keep in touch with coworkers and loved ones, JoJoCare is a platform where clients and professionals can stay connected through online conferences for easier (and safer) access to care that otherwise would be difficult to obtain. FSH sees this extending well beyond the current crisis, reshaping how people interact with healthcare providers forever.

Delivering care through telehealth, JoJoCare’s mission is two-fold:

  • to help field experts gain additional revenue stream by offering an innovative cost-effective avenue for their services,
  • and to help people easily talk to field experts for medical advice or other services within the comforts of their home.

Available 24/7, the JoJoCare platform allows users to book their virtual medical, legal, education, and general wellness appointments anytime which can be arranged via chat, audio, or video call. Streamlining the experience, users can also pay for these services online through online bank transfers or through the company’s proprietary payment gateway JoJoPay. JoJoCare has partnered with 20 general practitioners for its soft launch scheduled by the end of April, and will offer a number of free sessions to alleviate the impact of the pandemic.

“At First Shoshin, we advocate innovation that solves real-world problems and this venture into health technology is an exciting step for us,” said JoJoCare Chairperson Sally Ponce-Enrile. “We believe the future of healthcare is inseparable from telehealth.”

Ponce-Enrile says JoJoCare is modernizing telehealth by providing integrated services within the health and wellness industry under one platform as opposed to the fragmented apps available in the market. “JoJoCare maximizes access to a range of healthcare services not limited to medical. We want people to be able to virtually visit doctors, lawyers, educators, fitness experts, and other practitioners all in one place. This will also help rural communities that lack the healthcare infrastructure to access services that would otherwise be unavailable,” she said.

If you’re a licensed professional interested in joining the network of JoJoCare experts, you can get in touch with the JoJoCare team at hello@myjojo.com.

PBA set for shortened season

THE Philippine Basketball Association is bracing for a shortened season this year as the country’s battle with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic rages on.

Meeting via online on Tuesday, the PBA Board came out in agreement that Season 45 could be reduced to two conferences, or even one in a worst-case scenario, from the traditional three, if COVID-19 continues to be a telling concern.

“The leaning of the board right now is two conferences. But if the current situation extends we may be forced to have only one,” said PBA commissioner Willie Marcial after the meeting which he said lasted for only a little over an hour.

He added that primary for the league is the welfare of the fans, employees and players as they weigh all the options to come up with the best possible setup.

The PBA suspended all of its activities for the season on March 11 as the government declared a state of public health emergency with COVID-19 beginning to take root in the country.

Under a public health emergency all mass gatherings, including sporting events, are prohibited.

The suspension of activities came immediately on the heels of the opening of the PBA Philippine Cup on March 8, which saw the defending champions San Miguel Beermen beat the Magnolia Hotshots Pambansang Manok, 94-78.

The league was angling to resume proceedings this month or in May, hinged on the possibility of some semblance of normalcy after the 30-day Luzon-wide Enhanced Community Quarantine (ECQ) lapses on April 13.

But with the government deciding on April 7 to extend the ECQ for another two weeks, or until April 30, the PBA was forced to reevaluate its plans.

In the event Season 45 is reduced to two conferences, it would mark the first time since the mid-2000s that the league would make such an offering. 

Doing its part

While league action is at halt, Mr. Marcial said the PBA will continue to be active in doing its share in the fight against COVID-19 as well as providing help to the league’s game-day personnel like referees, statisticians and table officials, among others.

The PBA commissioner shared that the league will donate P1 million worth of personal protective equipment for medical frontliners.

As to the inaugural PBA 3×3 tournament, Mr. Marcial said it will still push through but the fate of the PBA D-League is still to be decided on.

The league is looking to have a more concrete plan moving forward when the board meets anew on April 30. – Michael Angelo S. Murillo

   

Pandemic forces postponement of Canadian F1 Grand Prix

LONDON — The June 14 Canadian Grand Prix in Montreal joined a growing list of Formula One races postponed due to the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on Tuesday, with the 2020 season yet to get on the starting grid.

The race is the ninth to be affected by the virus, with the March 15 season-opening Australian Grand Prix cancelled along with May’s showcase Monaco Grand Prix.

Commercial rights holder Liberty Media hopes to get the championship started in the European summer with a reduced and greatly rearranged schedule of between 15 and 18 races that could run into the New Year.

“At the moment it is crucial that all of our energies be put together to overcome COVID-19. We will welcome you with open arms at Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve as soon as it is safe to do so,” said Canadian Grand Prix CEO Francois Dumontier.

The race was promoted by Octane Racing Group and organizers said the decision to postpone, after regular discussions with city authorities and Formula One, was not taken lightly.

“We have heard the directives issued by public health officials and as a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic are following the expert guidance provided by the authorities,” added the organizers.

Almost half the COVID-19 cases in Canada are in the province of Quebec, of which Montreal is the largest city, where premier Francois Legault said on Sunday he hoped to see new diagnoses peak in a number of weeks.

He also extended a shutdown of non-essential businesses for another three weeks to May 4.

Formula One chairman Chase Carey said Formula One supported the necessary decision to ensure the safety of fans and F1 community.

“We always look forward to travelling to the incredible city of Montreal and while we will all have to wait a bit longer, we will put on a great show when we arrive later this year,” he added.

Organizers said tickets would remain valid and spectators will be informed of their options when a new date was decided.

Canada will have two drivers this season with Nicholas Latifi a rookie at Williams while Lance Stroll continues at Racing Point, a team owned by his father Lawrence.

“Naturally, I’m sad that I’ll have to wait for the chance to race at my home F1 event,” said Latifi on his Website.

“Since I’ve been competing, my ambition has been to represent my country at the highest level. And I’ve been looking forward to June’s race in Montreal ever since I was announced as a driver with Williams.

“But as action to control the spread of the virus stepped up, and other Montreal festivals were delayed or cancelled, today’s news was inevitable, I guess.”

Formula One now has to try to reschedule races in Bahrain, Vietnam, China, Azerbaijan, the Netherlands and Spain as well as Canada with France, Austria and Britain looking likely to join the list.

The British Grand Prix at Silverstone has set an April deadline to decide whether it can go ahead. — Reuters

ONE Championship chairman touts their edition of The Apprentice

SET to have their edition of the popular reality television program The Apprentice, ONE Championship CEO and Chairman Chatri Sityodtong said given what they have to offer as an organization they are confident that it is going to be a success.

One of the new offerings they will be having this year, The Apprentice: ONE Championship Edition, which is currently conducting auditions and set for premiere in the second half of 2020, makes sense across various levels for an organization like ONE Championship, said Mr. Sityodtong.

“Ultimately, The Apprentice is global general entertainment, and we feel that this is going to be a great way for fans all over the world who love ONE Championship to watch some fun stuff,” said the ONE chief.

Adding, “But more than that, mainstream audiences all over the world will finally get introduced to ONE Championship for the first time and this is our first foray for ONE Studios doing general entertainment content. So, there’s business reasons, as well as just for fun reasons for doing this.”

In The Apprentice: ONE Championship Edition 16 people will compete for the US$250,000 job offer and a chance to become Mr. Sityodtong’s protégé at ONE Championship, Asia’s largest sports media property.

The participants will compete in the business challenge – solving business problems in real time.

But a twist – in the form of physical challenges against ONE’s world champions – is also involved.

Mr. Sityodtong was quick to point out though that the physical challenges will be more of endurance challenges and not martial arts-based. 

“You don’t need any martial arts to apply. It’s basically testing your warrior spirit, testing your mental strength, testing how badly you want to work at ONE Championship,” he said.

And how does he see The Apprentice: ONE Championship Edition faring? Mr. Sityodtong has this to say, “Sorry Donald Trump, but we’re going to beat your numbers;” referring to the original The Apprentice star and now United States President.   

Apart from the reality TV show, ONE Championship, established in 2011, has also lined up other offerings, including a video game in the near future.

Mr. Sityodtong said that just like any business entity they are being challenged by the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. But they remain optimistic moving forward and committed to their vision of bringing to fore true Asian martial arts and values. – Michael Angelo S. Murillo

Garnett issues

KEVIN GARNETT has a long memory. It stems from, and also happens to fuel, his competitiveness. And he never forgets slights. During his playing days, he used them to keep focused on his intent to get the better of opponents. Heck, he found them even when there were seemingly none, and made sure to provide payback without letup. He simply didn’t take a play off. Doing so was beneath him; doing so would have prevented him from meeting his objective. Which is why he managed to put together a Hall-of-Fame career, and why he stands to be remembered among the Top 25 players in pro hoops annals.

These days, Garnett has nothing left to prove. He’s headed to Springfield as part of a star-studded 2020 Class. He’ll be enshrined alongside such notables as Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant, and without shame. He deserves to be front and center with them in August (assuming, of course, that the new coronavirus pandemic has been contained by then), just as he deserves to see the Celtics raise his jersey to the rafters next year. And, yes, precisely because of his accomplishments, he deserves to give himself a break. He can’t keep on holding grudges as if he still needs to in order to get ahead.

Perhaps Garnett has cause to stay angry. No doubt, Ray Allen’s refusal to communicate at all with him and other supposedly close teammates during a tumultuous offseason in 2012 hurt him, and not just because the hated Heat became beneficiaries of the breakup. And, no doubt, Glen Taylor’s refusal to, in his recollection, honor a verbal agreement he had with Flip Saunders hurt him, and not just because he would have landed in the Timberwolves’ front office. It’s a matter of pride, period. He believes his word to be his bond, and he expects the same from everybody else.

On the other hand, there is simply no benefit to staying stuck in the past. Frankly, Allen couldn’t care less if he moved on or not. And Taylor is the same. Meanwhile, he’s left to look like a fool who can’t take the high road — even if it’s clearly best for him. He conveniently forgot that he wouldn’t have gone to the Celtics in the first place were the subject of his ire not the first to commit to the green and white in 2007. And he wouldn’t have been the target of the ambitious trade deal were he not first the focal point of the Timberwolves throughout his first 12 years in the NBA.

Allen wants to mend fences with Garnett because the Celtics deserve a reunion of their Doc Rivers-coached powerhouse in the late 2000s. Taylor is similarly keen on rekindling ties with him because he deserves to have his time with the Timberwolves celebrated as well. He doesn’t want to, though. He isn’t even anywhere near the zip code of acceptance. Which is just too bad. His stubbornness is his loss. Most importantly, it’s the fans’ loss. They would want nothing more than to honor him for his unparalleled selflessness on the court. Unfortunately, they’re being prevented by his selfishness off it. 

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994.

1...9,6699,6709,671...14,238Page 9,670 of 14,238
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube