即使是的話,也一定有點不同,美國個别州分去年8月推出5G,只看到網上有不適的報告,但沒有如武漢發生的大批死亡事件。
中共揭示探測冠狀病毒密切接觸的手機應用輭件
Сhina unveils mobile app that DETECTS coronavirus close contact
10 Feb, 2020
不清楚輭件如何能做到及有多準確It's unclear how the app works & how accurate it is
A mobile application developed by the Chinese government and a state-run tech company is reported to warn users when they are at imminent risk of contracting the killer coronavirus, which has claimed more than 900 lives.
The "close contact detector" has become available to Chinese users, requiring only their name, phone number and ID for installation, Xinhua reported on Monday. The app then lets the user know if they have been in contact with someone infected by the deadly 2019-nCoV virus.
The General Office of the State Council, the National Health Commission (NHC) and the government-owned China Electronics Technology Group Corporations (CETC) teamed up to design the potentially life-saving application.
It's unclear how the app works and how accurate it is. The NHC only said that "close contact" refers to someone who – with no protection – shared the same office, classroom or house with confirmed coronavirus patients, or traveled with them on the same flight or enclosed air-conditioned train.
This is not the first online solution to have been designed during the sweeping coronavirus outbreak.
Qihoo 360, China's biggest cybersecurity company, has also come up with an application that lets users check if they traveled by plane or train with someone who caught the virus.
Search engine Baidu has released an add-on for its Baidu Map app, which locates confirmed and suspected cases in cities that have been put on lockdown. The map also shows real-time data on the coronavirus, including traffic updates and epidemic control checkpoints.
https://www.rt.com/news/480469-china-coronavirus-detector-app/
我有朋友確是這樣懷疑冠狀病毒實情是5G病毒。這也不足為奇,因為常理而言共產黨能讓你知道武漢病毒是p4實驗室製造的基因工程病毒,就必定有更大的秘密在背後,但這様的説法需要更多的數據和證據。
As i told you before this in fact the 5G virus and not corona i don't know what
Hamrol Pereira
There’s something odd about all the details being reported from Wuhan. No one can make sense of the reports. It’s a sign that the narrative is not true. And it’s a massive fake. Hence the need for a lockdown – to stop information from emerging.
5G virus. Someone’s pulling our legs. The initial symptoms of the first patients were quite mild, seemingly no more than a typical winter flu and thus of no special concern. It was only after about two weeks, when the symptoms became more severe and patients required hospitalisation, that medical experts realised they were dealing with a new contagion.
After that, things happened very quickly with extensive tests and investigation, the discovery of the new coronavirus, the decoding of its entire genome and the distribution of that genome to the WHO and other authorities, all accomplished within about two weeks. China’s quick reaction and solid results generated worldwide praise from officials. Public announcements were made at the same time, revealing the facts available to date.
Chinese medical authorities took great comfort initially from the fact the infections at the outset showed no tendency to spread between humans, a blessing which was dutifully reported. No secondary infections had been identified, and no medical staff had become infected. Then suddenly, during that initial two weeks, perhaps due to adaptation or mutation, the virus began exhibiting contagious tendencies and about a dozen medical staff became suddenly infected, apparently from a single patient.
This constituted a material change in the circumstances, since a freely-contagious coronavirus could run rampant through the population. It was at this point that the authorities immediately instituted the effective quarantine first of Wuhan then of most of Hubei Province, a quarantine that has now expanded to several other cities in other provinces in an attempt to corral the virus and prevent wider contagion. And again, China’s quick reaction and solid results generated worldwide praise from officials.
I want to create some further necessary context by imagining a hypothetical situation. A major pharmaceutical company discovers that some batches of a frequently-prescribed medication may have been contaminated. At the beginning, there are still few facts and little is known about the extent or the severity of the contamination. How would a responsible corporation deal with this?
This may be counter-intuitive, but making an immediate public announcement would be reckless, potentially creating needless public alarm and even panic, as well as damaging public confidence and the company as well. Of course, the prime concern is the public welfare, but the company must first (admittedly very quickly) gather sufficient facts and information to understand the scope of the problem and the gravity of the overall situation. This fact-gathering process should require only a few days or perhaps a week or two at most, depending on circumstances. Public announcements in the absence of facts would be premature and even irresponsible.
If the contamination is discovered to be limited to one small batch which can be identified and recalled before use, the problem is solved. If the evidence is that many or an unknown number of batches may have been contaminated and locations are unknown, the problem and the danger to the public clearly become greater. An additional concern is the nature of the contamination and the degree of danger it presents to the public health, whether the effects of ingesting a contaminated medication would be minor or potentially lethal.
If the facts indicate that the contamination could have major negative consequences to the public and that the scope is unknown or not easily determinable, meaning the contamination cannot be easily contained, then an immediate public announcement is warranted, and indeed mandatory. However, none of this happens in a vacuum. National health authorities must first be advised and their opinion and guidance sought as to the content and timing of the public announcement as well as instructions on appropriate methods of solution.
The decisions of timing and content of a public announcement are made by the management of both the company and the national health authority. Rank and file staff of either group are not involved in this process since they haven’t the knowledge or experience. Typically, executives of both groups will decide on content and appoint a spokesperson to convey the necessary information to the public, done in a manner to inform but not alarm or panic the public.
But what happens if someone short-circuits this process? What if a low-level staff member at the pharmaceutical company learns of a possible contamination, assumes incorrectly the contamination involves HIV or the Bubonic Plague, and posts messages on social media to this effect?
Wuhan is a 5G testbed in China. Do they need a cover story for all the sickness it is causing? Is this in fact the 5G virus?
https://www.facebook.com/100004822592954/posts/1142122499291826/
沒有留言:
發佈留言