WUHAN, China: In the early days in Wuhan, the first city first struck by the virus, getting a COVID test was so difficult that residents compared it to winning the lottery.
Throughout the Chinese city in January, thousands of people waited in hours-long lines for hospitals, sometimes next to corpses lying in hallways. But most couldn’t get the test they needed to be admitted as patients. And for the few who did, the tests were often faulty, resulting in false negatives.
The widespread test shortages and problems at a time when the virus could have been slowed were caused largely by secrecy and cronyism at China’s top disease control agency, an Associated Press investigation has found.
The flawed testing system prevented scientists and officials from seeing how fast the virus was spreading – another way China fumbled its early response to the virus. Earlier AP reporting showed how top Chinese leaders delayed warning the public and withheld information from the World Health Organization, supplying the most comprehensive picture yet of China’s initial missteps. Taken together, these mistakes in January facilitated the virus’ spread through Wuhan and across the world undetected, in a pandemic that has now sickened more than 64 million people and killed almost 1.5 million.
China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention gave test kit designs and distribution rights exclusively to three then-obscure Shanghai companies with which officials had personal ties, the reporting found. The deals took place within a culture of backdoor connections that quietly flourished in an underfunded public health system, according to the investigation, which was based on interviews with more than 40 doctors, CDC employees, health experts, and industry insiders, as well as hundreds of internal documents, contracts, messages and emails obtained by the AP.
The Shanghai companies – GeneoDx Biotech, Huirui Biotechnology, and BioGerm Medical Technology – paid the China CDC for the information and the distribution rights, according to two sources with knowledge of the transaction who asked to remain anonymous to avoid retribution. The price: One million RMB ($146,600) each, the sources said. It’s unclear whether the money went to specific individuals.
In the meantime, the CDC and its parent agency, the National Health Commission, tried to prevent other scientists and organizations from testing for the virus with their own homemade kits. In a departure from past practice for at least two epidemics, the NHC told Wuhan hospitals to send virus samples – from which tests can be developed – only to labs under its authority. It also made testing requirements to confirm coronavirus cases much more complicated, and endorsed only test kits made by the Shanghai companies.
These measures contributed to not a single new case being reported by Chinese authorities between Jan. 5 and 17, even though retrospective infection data shows that hundreds were infected. The apparent lull in cases meant officials were slow to take early actions such as warning the public, barring large gatherings and curbing travel. One study estimates that intervention two weeks earlier could have reduced the number of cases by 86 percent, although it’s uncertain whether earlier action could have halted the spread of the virus worldwide.
When tests from the three companies arrived, many didn’t work properly, turning out inconclusive results or false negatives. And technicians were hesitant to use test kits that would later prove more accurate from more established companies, because the CDC did not endorse them.
With few and faulty kits, only one in 19 infected people in Wuhan was tested and found positive as of Jan. 31, according to an estimate by Imperial College London. Others without tests or with false negatives were sent back home, where they could spread the virus.
Days after he first started coughing on Jan. 23rd, Peng Yi, a 39-year-old schoolteacher, waited in an eight-hour line at a Wuhan hospital. A CT scan showed signs of viral infection in both his lungs, but he couldn’t get the test he needed to be hospitalized.
When Peng finally got a test on Jan. 30, it turned out negative. But his fever wouldn’t drop, and his family begged officials for another test.
His second test, on Feb. 4, turned out positive. It was too late. Weeks later, Peng passed away.
China was hardly the only country to grapple with testing, which varied widely from nation to nation. Germany, for example, developed a test that became the World Health Organization gold standard days after the Chinese government released genetic sequences on Jan. 12. But in the US, the CDC declined to use the WHO design and insisted on developing its own kits, which turned out to be faulty and led to even longer delays than in China.
Other countries also had the benefit of learning from China’s experience. But China was grappling with a new pathogen, and it wasn’t yet clear how bad the pandemic would be or how many tests would be needed.
“It was very early,” said Jane Duckett, a professor at the University of Glasgow examining the Chinese government’s response to the coronavirus. She said the government was “just trying to figure it out.”
Still, the hiccups and delays in China were especially consequential because it was the first country to detect the virus.
“Because you have only three companies providing testing kits, it kept the capacity of testing very limited,” said Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations. “It was a major problem that led to the rapid increase in cases and deaths.”
China coronavirus testing blunders stemmed from secret deals with firms
https://arab.news/8ya93
China coronavirus testing blunders stemmed from secret deals with firms
- Flawed testing system prevented scientists and officials from seeing how fast the virus was spreading
Ben & Jerry’s risks ‘destruction’ under parent company Magnum, co-founder says
- Ben Cohen’s remarks part of long-running dispute over ice cream maker’s freedom to pursue social mission
- Company has long supported pro-Palestinian cause through business operations
LONDON: The co-founder of Ben & Jerry’s has said the ice cream brand will be destroyed if it remains with parent company Magnum, the BBC reported.
Ben Cohen’s remarks are the latest in a longtime feud between Ben & Jerry’s and Magnum over the former’s freedom to pursue its social mission and retain independence over its board.
The Magnum Ice Cream Co. on Monday began trading on the European stock market after spinning off from owner Unilever.
Magnum wants to strengthen Ben & Jerry’s “powerful, nonpartisan values-based position in the world,” a spokesperson said.
In 2000, Ben & Jerry’s was sold to Unilever as part of a deal that saw it retain an independent board and the right to pursue its social mission.
But the deal led to clashes between the Vermont, US brand and its owner.
The feud has now been inherited by Magnum.
Ben & Jerry’s has long supported the Palestinian cause. In 2021 it prohibited the sale of its products in areas occupied by Israel.
In response, its Israeli operation was sold by Unilever to a local licensee.
In October, Cohen said the brand was prevented from launching an ice cream product that expressed “solidarity with Palestine.”
Ahead of its spin-off from Unilever last month, Magnum said that Anuradha Mittal, chair of Ben & Jerry’s, “no longer met the criteria to serve.”
Mittal has held the position since 2018 but was encouraged to resign following an internal audit conducted by Magnum, which found a “series of material deficiencies in financial controls, governance and other compliance policies, including conflicts of interest,” according to a spokesperson.
“So far, the trustees have not fully addressed the deficiencies identified.”
Mittal, speaking to Reuters, said: “The so-called audit of the foundation was a manufactured inquiry, engineered to attempt to discredit me.
“It is important to understand that this is not simply an attack on me as chair, it is Unilever’s attempt to undermine the authority of the board itself.”
Cohen said that Magnum had “no standing to determine who the chair of the independent board should be.”
“Therefore, by trying to (change the chair of the board), I would say that Magnum is not fit to own Ben & Jerry’s.”
Ben & Jerry’s must be either owned by a “group of investors that support the brand” and sought to encourage its values, or Magnum should make a “180-degree turnaround and say they support the chairman of the independent board,” Cohen said.
Mittal said she had no plans to step down from the board ahead of Magnum’s share market entry this week.
Cohen is still an employee of Ben & Jerry’s and is the most high-profile spokesperson for the brand. But he told the BBC that under Magnum’s ownership, the ice cream maker could end up losing its most “loyal” customers.
“If the company continues to be owned by Magnum, not only will the values be lost but the essence of the brand will be lost,” he said.
Magnum CEO Peter ter Kulve told the Financial Times on Sunday that Ben & Jerry’s founders — Cohen and Jerry Greenfield — were in their 70s and “at a certain moment they need to hand over to a new generation.”
Greenfield left the company this year over concerns that its social mission was being stifled.
Cohen said: “As they destroy Ben and Jerry’s values, they will destroy that following and they will destroy that brand. It’ll become just another piece of frozen mush that is just going to lose a lot of market share.”










