Tag Archive: Taiwan


H7N9 case has drug- and non-resistant strains

Breaking News, World News and Taiwan News.

Poultry price could increase as a result of ban
This photo shows chicken that were dyed blue and will be destroyed in New Taipei, yesterday. New Taipei City government yesterday conducted an inspection in traditional markets and seized 150 chickens from some vendors that did not have certificates to show that the poultry is from a government-certified slaughterhouses. (CNA)

 

 

 

TAIPEI, Taiwan — The only H7N9 patient so far in Taiwan was carrying two strains of the same virus, with one being drug resistant and the other not, making it tricky to treat to him, doctors said yesterday.

Huang Li-min, a doctor from National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH), explained that it was possible the avian flu virus was not drug resistant when the patient was first infected, but mutated later to become resistant to Tamiflu.

With Tamiflu failing, NTUH later switched to another intravenous drug, Huang said. Because of the presence of the two strains simultaneously, it was difficult for doctors to determine how much the virus’ drug resistance had undermined the therapy.

 

Read Full Article Here

 

************************************************************************************************

The New Bird Flu: How Dangerous Is Avian Flu H7N9?

Beware the New Bird Flu (photo: wikipedia)

Until a few days ago, most of us had never heard of influenza A (H7N9), the new bird flu virus that’s suddenly killing people in China. Then on April 1st the death reports started to come in, and all of a sudden health experts began to sound awfully nervous.

That’s because although the virus has infected a very small number of people, it’s killed or critically sickened a high proportion of them.

The toll is rising daily, with new cases and deaths reported on the World Health Organization’s Disease Outbreak News site. As of today, 18 cases were laboratory confirmed, but of those infected, six have died and four are in critical condition.

I don’t have to tell you that a flu that kills or critically sickens more than half of those who contract it must be taken very seriously.

A Genetic Threat

The virulence of the H7N9 virus is not the only reason health officials around the world are scurrying to figure out the scope of the danger it poses. Genetic evaluation of the H7N9 virus shows it has the ability to mutate readily. Here’s how the World Health Organization (WHO) put it in a statement  released yesterday: “analysis of the genes of these viruses suggests that although they have evolved from avian (bird) viruses, they show signs of adaptation to growth in mammalian species.”

Should We Worry About Catching the H7N9 Avian Flu Here in the U.S.?

Right now, you’d be borrowing trouble. All the cases have been in China, either in Shanghai or the nearby provinces of Jiangsu and Anhui. And so far, H7N9 has not been found to be transmissable from human to human. All those who’ve contracted it have had contact with poultry. Both pigeons and chickens have tested positive for the virus.

As Forbes.com’s Russell Flannery reported yesterday, all poultry markets in Shanghai were closed yesterday as Chinese officials try to stop the spread of infection. Poultry dealers also began killing chickens from markets where birds had tested positive for the virus.

However, that could change. According to the CDC, however, this type of virus has “the potential to become a pandemic if it changed to become easily and sustainably spread from person to person.” Yesterday the CDC issued an official public health advisory on H7N9 under the auspices of emergency preparedness and response.

The CDC advises clinicians to be on the lookout for H7N9 in “patients with respiratory illness and an appropriate travel or exposure history.” In other words, if you come down with severe flu symptoms and you’ve recently been to China, let your doctor know right away.

There’s also the issue of the virus travelling with people who are already infected. Yesterday, six possible cases of H7N9 were reported in Taiwan. All were tested; four were found not to be H7N9 and two have yet to be confirmed.

 

Read Full Article Here

About these ads

May 16, 2013 (CIDRAP News) – Though the steady stream of new H7N9 cases has tapered, the pace of publications on the new virus is still brisk, with new reports today on Taiwan’s case, a link between markets and human cases, and risk assessment and planning for possible scenarios in Europe.

All three reports were published in today’s issue of Eurosurveillance.

Lessons from Taiwan’s H7N9 case
In the report on Taiwan’s only case, officials from the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control wrote that they learned several useful lessons from the case involving a man in his 50s who got sick in the middle of April after traveling for work to China’s Jiangsu province, where the virus had already sickened people and been detected in live-market poultry.

Within days of the announcement of the first cases in China, Taiwanese officials made H7N9 a notifiable disease and prepared for suspected cases to be detected through its influenza surveillance system, as well as the surveillance system for community-acquired pneumonia of unknown cause.

The enhanced surveillance activities helped flag the man’s illness. His was the only H7N9 infection confirmed in Taiwan among 358 suspected cases and 41 severe pneumonia illnesses from Apr 3 through May 10.

The authors noted that the man did not have a cough and didn’t meet the official case definition, but his doctors reported his illness as a suspected infection anyway, given his recent travel to China’s outbreak area. They suggested that physicians be allowed to report suspected cases that don’t fully meet case definitions.

The patient’s throat swabs were negative for the H7N9 virus on day 4 and 9 after his illness onset, but an endotracheal aspirate collected on day 8 was positive for the new virus. Taiwan officials wrote that the testing experience led them to revise their sampling guidance.

No H7N9 infections have been found in any of the man’s 139 contacts, including three healthcare workers who had respiratory symptoms a few days after they were exposed to the patient. The team noted the healthcare workers who had symptoms provided routine care using N95 respirators, goggles, gloves, and protective clothing.

Strong link between human cases, poultry
Meanwhile, health workers involved in outbreak response in Huzhou City, located in China’s Zhejiang province, found a strong link between illnesses in 12 patients and local poultry in different settings, according to another Eurosurveillance report.

They described 12 patients whose H7N9 cases were confirmed from late March to May 10. Ages ranged from 32 to 81. Ten had underlying medical conditions such as hypertension, bronchitis, and heart disease.

Nine of the 12 patients had visited live-poultry markets within 10 days of getting sick. The three others had a history of direct contact with poultry shortly before they started having symptoms. One had culled poultry from the live markets, one had purchased live poultry from a vendor and raised them with a neighbor in a courtyard, and one was the spouse of a man who had bought live birds from a market and brought them home to raise.

Researchers collected poultry and/or environmental samples from nine poultry markets linked to the cases, the home settings where case-patients kept their birds, and seven other live-poultry markets in the area that the patients had not visited. Evidence of H7N9 was found in samples from all of the settings.

The team wrote that the findings support the hypothesis that poultry are the source of the H7N9 virus, and they noted that no new cases in Huzhou City have been reported since live markets were shuttered there in the middle of April.

A reported lack of poultry exposure in some of the earlier cases in the outbreak might stem from some patients forgetting details of their exposure history or because they are too sick to provide the details. “It may therefore be possible that patients with no documented exposure may have in fact been exposed to poultry,” they wrote.

Testing of 339 close contacts found no other H7N9 infections, and although throat swabs might not yield the virus as reliably as deep sputum samples, the patients had no obvious symptoms, the authors wrote.

Read Full Report  Here

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Janet C. Phelan
Activist Post

Amidst allegations by a highly placed Colonel in the Chinese army that the U.S. has released a bioweapon in Mainland China, concerns are ramping up that this year’s version of the avian flu, H7N9, may turn into a major pandemic.

The last few years have seen several false alarms on the pandemic front. Neither the bird flu of 2004 nor the swine flu of 2009-2010 ended up being of much concern, although agencies from the WHO on down certainly created quite a flurry around both of these flu bugs.

H7N9 has already shown itself to have a high mortality rate, higher in fact than the Spanish flu of 1918, which caused 50 million deaths worldwide. The latest figures show H7N9 as having a mortality rate of 21- 24%. Out of 131 reported cases, thirty-one have died and most remain on the critical list. The bug has already jumped from Mainland China to Taiwan and a number of articles on H7N9 have nervously published the flight paths out of China to the rest of the world, which show how quickly an infected person or persons could create a global pandemic.

According to Keiji Fukuda, WHO’s assistant director-general for health, security and the environment, “This is definitely one of the most lethal influenza viruses that we have seen so far.”

Already, there are questions as to whether H7N9 has mutated and is now transmissible from human to human. Of those who have been documented as infected with this flu, several are family members of others who have been infected. As quoted in Quartz on April 18, “The Chinese National Health and Family Planning Commission said on Thursday it could not rule out human-to-human transmission in the case of a Shanghai family—two brothers, at least one of whom has the virus, and their 87-year-old father, who was the first confirmed H7N9 fatality. A husband and wife in Shanghai also both contracted H7N9.” (Source)

 

Read Full Article Here

Date: 26 April 2013 Time: 09:44 PM ET

 

Influenza A H7N9 as viewed through an electron microscope. Both filaments and spheres are observed in this photo.
Influenza A H7N9 as viewed through an electron microscope. Both filaments and spheres are observed in this photo.
CREDIT: CDC

Jeff Nesbit was the director of public affairs for two prominent federal science agencies and is a regular contributor to U.S. News & World Report, where this article first ran before appearing in LiveScience’s Expert Voices: Op-Ed & Insights.

It’s time for the world’s public health officials to pay very close attention to the new bird flu outbreak in China first detected in March. To put it bluntly, there are now some seriously dangerous developments occurring around the new disease outbreak in China that infectious disease specialists and international public health specialists need to track closely.

Let’s start with three new developments reported on earlier this week by Jason Koebler, U.S. News & World Report’s science and technology correspondent:  the first reported case of the new bird flu strain outside China; the fact that any potential vaccine tests in animals (not humans) may be up to six weeks out; and, more ominously, that Chinese officials suspect that there may be cases of human to human transmission in the 100-plus reported cases (which include 22 deaths). [Bird-Flu Update: Possible Cases of Human-to-Human Transmission Investigated]

“The situation remains complex and difficult and evolving. When we look at influenza viruses, this is an unusually dangerous virus for humans,” Keiji Fukuda, the World Health Organization’s assistant director-general for health security, said Wednesday at a briefing.

Chinese officials —and public health officials around the world —had hoped that this potentially virulent and deadly bird flu strain (H7N9) could be contained inside China and that it would not progress or mutate to the point where humans could transmit the strain to other humans. But, of the patients analyzed so far, half appear to have had no contact whatsoever with poultry.

Now, with the first reported case outside China appearing in Taiwan this week — a 53-year-old male, Taiwanese citizen who worked in the Jiangsu Province in China, developed symptoms three days after returning to Taiwan, according to Taiwan’s Central Epidemic Command Center —and the fact that Chinese officials are publicly saying that at least some of the existing cases may have involved human-to-human transmission, this new bird flu strain could spread —and fast. [New Bird Flu Virus: 6 Things You Should Know]

None of this is good.

Right now, 18 percent of the cases in China have ended in deaths. While this is still less deadly than the previous avian flu outbreak in China six years ago —the H5N1 bird flu virus eventually killed more than 300 people after spreading from China to other countries in 2006 —the death rate for this new Chinese bird flu epidemic is more than triple the mortality rate of tuberculosis in China today.

 

Read Full Article Here

Earth Watch Report  -  Earthquakes

Japan -  Eight  Earthquakes ranging from  5.3 to 4.4 Magnitude registered  April  18th  2013 b photo Japan-EightEarthquakesrangingfrom53to44MagnituderegisteredApril18th2013_zps1ea1a7ac.jpg

Japan -  Eight  Earthquakes ranging from  5.3 to 4.4 Magnitude registered  April  18th  2013 photo Japan-EightEarthquakesrangingfrom53to44MagnituderegisteredApril18th2013b_zpsdfd0ee13.jpg

4.7 41km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 00:38:04 24.840°N 123.019°E 10.8

M4.7 – 41km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 00:38:04 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.840°N, 123.019°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 00:38:04 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 08:38:04 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 19:38:04 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.840°N 123.019°E depth=10.8km (6.7mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 41km (25mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 121km (75mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 127km (79mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  4. 128km (80mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 947km (588mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.6 157km SSE of Hachijo-jima, Japan 2013-04-18 03:42:50 31.726°N 140.288°E 74.5

M4.6 – 157km SSE of Hachijo-jima, Japan 2013-04-18 03:42:50 UTC

Earthquake location 31.726°N, 140.288°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 03:42:50 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 12:42:50 UTC+09:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 22:42:50 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

31.726°N 140.288°E depth=74.5km (46.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 157km (98mi) SSE of Hachijo-jima, Japan
  2. 349km (217mi) SSE of Shimoda, Japan
  3. 363km (226mi) S of Tateyama, Japan
  4. 372km (231mi) SSE of Oyama, Japan
  5. 443km (275mi) S of Tokyo, Japan

4.7 30km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 04:18:35 24.740°N 122.952°E 10.4

M4.7 – 30km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 04:18:35 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.740°N, 122.952°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 04:18:35 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 12:18:35 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 23:18:35 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.740°N 122.952°E depth=10.4km (6.5mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 30km (19mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 112km (70mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 121km (75mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  4. 129km (80mi) ESE of Keelung, Taiwan
  5. 938km (583mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 30km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 04:18:35 24.740°N 122.952°E 10.4

M4.7 – 30km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 04:18:35 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.740°N, 122.952°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 04:18:35 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 12:18:35 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 23:18:35 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.740°N 122.952°E depth=10.4km (6.5mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 30km (19mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 112km (70mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 121km (75mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  4. 129km (80mi) ESE of Keelung, Taiwan
  5. 938km (583mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.8 53km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 08:19:57 24.855°N 123.312°E 36.9

M4.8 – 53km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 08:19:57 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.855°N, 123.312°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 08:19:57 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 16:19:57 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-18 03:19:57 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.855°N 123.312°E depth=36.9km (22.9mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 53km (33mi) NE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 102km (63mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 150km (93mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 157km (98mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 976km (606mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.4 20km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 08:37:12 24.650°N 123.047°E 44.0

M4.4 – 20km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 08:37:12 UTC

Earthquake location 24.650°N, 123.047°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 08:37:12 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 16:37:12 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-18 03:37:12 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.650°N 123.047°E depth=44.0km (27.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 20km (12mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 117km (73mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 121km (75mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 131km (81mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 945km (587mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

5.3 62km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 14:08:36 24.936°N 123.342°E 16.9

M5.3 – 62km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 14:08:36 UTC

Earthquake location 24.936°N, 123.342°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 14:08:36 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 22:08:36 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-18 09:08:36 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.936°N 123.342°E depth=16.9km (10.5mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 62km (39mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 105km (65mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 155km (96mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 161km (100mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 981km (610mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.6 74km ENE of Miyako, Japan 2013-04-18 23:08:07 39.912°N 142.748°E 44.1

M4.6 – 74km ENE of Miyako, Japan 2013-04-18 23:08:07 UTC

 

Earthquake location 39.912°N, 142.748°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 23:08:07 UTC
  2. 2013-04-19 09:08:07 UTC+10:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-18 18:08:07 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

39.912°N 142.748°E depth=44.1km (27.4mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 74km (46mi) ENE of Miyako, Japan
  2. 84km (52mi) NE of Yamada, Japan
  3. 94km (58mi) NE of Otsuchi, Japan
  4. 103km (64mi) NE of Kamaishi, Japan
  5. 540km (336mi) NNE of Tokyo, Japan

….

Earth  Watch Report  -  Earthquakes

20 EQ Japan  April 17th  2013 photo 20EQJapanApril17th2013_zps2a7c0325.jpg

20 EQ Japan  April 17th  2013 b photo 20EQJapanApril17th2013b_zpsc325435a.jpg

Instrumental Intensity

ShakeMap Intensity Image

4.4 82km SSE of Shimoda, Japan 2013-04-17 02:13:58 34.021°N 139.392°E 13.1

M4.4 – 82km SSE of Shimoda, Japan 2013-04-17 02:13:58 UTC

Earthquake location 34.021°N, 139.392°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 02:13:58 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 11:13:58 UTC+09:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-16 21:13:58 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

34.021°N 139.392°E depth=13.1km (8.1mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 82km (51mi) SSE of Shimoda, Japan
  2. 108km (67mi) SSE of Ito, Japan
  3. 115km (71mi) SSW of Tateyama, Japan
  4. 122km (76mi) SSE of Atami, Japan
  5. 187km (116mi) S of Tokyo, Japan

4.2 12km NNE of Ishigaki, Japan 2013-04-17 05:56:58 24.457°N 124.193°E 10.2

M4.2 – 12km NNE of Ishigaki, Japan 2013-04-17 05:56:58 UTC

Earthquake location 24.457°N, 124.193°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 05:56:58 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 13:56:58 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 00:56:58 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.457°N 124.193°E depth=10.2km (6.4mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 12km (7mi) NNE of Ishigaki, Japan
  2. 116km (72mi) WSW of Hirara, Japan
  3. 237km (147mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 249km (155mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 1053km (654mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 59km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 05:57:58 24.852°N 123.405°E 10.0

M4.7 – 59km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 05:57:58 UTC

Earthquake location 24.852°N, 123.405°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 05:57:58 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 13:57:58 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 00:57:58 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.852°N 123.405°E depth=10.0km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 59km (37mi) NE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 94km (58mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 159km (99mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 167km (104mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 985km (612mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 57km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:33:47 24.871°N 123.363°E 7.3

M4.7 – 57km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:33:47 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.871°N, 123.363°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 06:33:47 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 14:33:47 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 01:33:47 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.871°N 123.363°E depth=7.3km (4.5mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 57km (35mi) NE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 99km (62mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 155km (96mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 163km (101mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 982km (610mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.9 47km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:43:02 24.839°N 123.229°E 9.9

M4.9 – 47km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:43:02 UTC

Earthquake location 24.839°N, 123.229°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 06:43:02 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 14:43:02 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 01:43:02 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.839°N 123.229°E depth=9.9km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 47km (29mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 108km (67mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 142km (88mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 149km (93mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 968km (601mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.9 55km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:50:18 24.905°N 123.273°E 10.0

M4.9 – 55km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 06:50:18 UTC

Earthquake location 24.905°N, 123.273°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 06:50:18 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 14:50:18 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 01:50:18 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.905°N 123.273°E depth=10.0km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 55km (34mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 108km (67mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 147km (91mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 154km (96mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 974km (605mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.4 57km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 07:10:34 24.873°N 123.359°E 11.5

M4.4 – 57km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 07:10:34 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.873°N, 123.359°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 07:10:34 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 15:10:34 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 02:10:34 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.873°N 123.359°E depth=11.5km (7.1mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 57km (35mi) NE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 99km (62mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 155km (96mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 162km (101mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 981km (610mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.9 42km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 07:26:00 24.847°N 122.950°E 9.9

M4.9 – 42km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 07:26:00 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.847°N, 122.950°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 07:26:00 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 15:26:00 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 02:26:00 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.847°N 122.950°E depth=9.9km (6.1mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 42km (26mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 114km (71mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 121km (75mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  4. 125km (78mi) ESE of Keelung, Taiwan
  5. 941km (585mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 39km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 08:13:56 24.803°N 123.128°E 10.2

M4.7 – 39km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 08:13:56 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.803°N, 123.128°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 08:13:56 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 16:13:56 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 03:13:56 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.803°N 123.128°E depth=10.2km (6.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 39km (24mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 115km (71mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 131km (81mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 139km (86mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 957km (595mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 42km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 08:23:38 24.843°N 123.076°E 10.0

M4.7 – 42km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 08:23:38 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.843°N, 123.076°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 08:23:38 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 16:23:38 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 03:23:38 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.843°N 123.076°E depth=10.0km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 42km (26mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 122km (76mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 126km (78mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 134km (83mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 953km (592mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

5.6 70km SSE of Shimoda, Japan 2013-04-17 08:57:21 34.126°N 139.355°E 19.1

M5.6 – 70km SSE of Shimoda, Japan 2013-04-17 08:57:21 UTC

Earthquake location 34.126°N, 139.355°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 08:57:21 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 17:57:21 UTC+09:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 03:57:21 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

34.126°N 139.355°E depth=19.1km (11.9mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 70km (43mi) SSE of Shimoda, Japan
  2. 96km (60mi) SSE of Ito, Japan
  3. 106km (66mi) SSW of Tateyama, Japan
  4. 110km (68mi) SSE of Atami, Japan
  5. 176km (109mi) S of Tokyo, Japan

4.5 62km ENE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 09:30:03 24.775°N 123.513°E 10.0

M4.5 – 62km ENE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 09:30:03 UTC

Earthquake location 24.775°N, 123.513°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 09:30:03 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 17:30:03 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 04:30:03 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.775°N 123.513°E depth=10.0km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 62km (39mi) ENE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 80km (50mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 169km (105mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 177km (110mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 994km (618mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.6 56km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 09:39:22 24.866°N 123.350°E 10.2

M4.6 – 56km NE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 09:39:22 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.866°N, 123.350°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 09:39:22 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 17:39:22 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 04:39:22 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.866°N 123.350°E depth=10.2km (6.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 56km (35mi) NE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 100km (62mi) NW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 154km (96mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 161km (100mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 980km (609mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

5.0 47km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 11:11:58 24.832°N 123.243°E 10.3

M5.0 – 47km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 11:11:58 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.832°N, 123.243°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 11:11:58 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 19:11:58 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 06:11:58 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.832°N 123.243°E depth=10.3km (6.4mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 47km (29mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 107km (66mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 143km (89mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 150km (93mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 969km (602mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.4 48km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 11:59:00 24.848°N 123.228°E 10.3

M4.4 – 48km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 11:59:00 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.848°N, 123.228°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 11:59:00 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 19:59:00 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 06:59:00 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.848°N 123.228°E depth=10.3km (6.4mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 48km (30mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 109km (68mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 142km (88mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 149km (93mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 968km (601mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

5.7 18km ENE of Ishinomaki, Japan 2013-04-17 12:03:31 38.478°N 141.494°E 45.5

M5.7 – 18km ENE of Ishinomaki, Japan 2013-04-17 12:03:31 UTC

Earthquake location 38.478°N, 141.494°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 12:03:31 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 21:03:31 UTC+09:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 07:03:31 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

38.478°N 141.494°E depth=45.5km (28.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 18km (11mi) ENE of Ishinomaki, Japan
  2. 24km (15mi) ENE of Yamoto, Japan
  3. 32km (20mi) E of Wakuya, Japan
  4. 39km (24mi) ESE of Kogota, Japan
  5. 348km (216mi) NNE of Tokyo, Japan

4.3 21km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 15:00:01 24.658°N 122.998°E 26.2

M4.3 – 21km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 15:00:01 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.658°N, 122.998°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 15:00:01 UTC
  2. 2013-04-17 23:00:01 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 10:00:01 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.658°N 122.998°E depth=26.2km (16.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 21km (13mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 116km (72mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 122km (76mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  4. 126km (78mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 940km (584mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 49km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 21:13:46 24.869°N 123.201°E 10.2

M4.7 – 49km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 21:13:46 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.869°N, 123.201°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 21:13:46 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 05:13:46 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 16:13:46 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.869°N 123.201°E depth=10.2km (6.3mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 49km (30mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 112km (70mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 139km (86mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 146km (91mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 966km (600mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.3 36km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 21:52:23 24.794°N 123.075°E 10.0

M4.3 – 36km NNE of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-17 21:52:23 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.794°N, 123.075°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-17 21:52:23 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 05:52:23 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 16:52:23 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.794°N 123.075°E depth=10.0km (6.2mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 36km (22mi) NNE of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 120km (75mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  3. 125km (78mi) E of Su’ao, Taiwan
  4. 133km (83mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 951km (591mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

4.7 41km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 00:38:04 24.840°N 123.019°E 10.8

M4.7 – 41km N of Yonakuni, Japan 2013-04-18 00:38:04 UTC

 

Earthquake location 24.840°N, 123.019°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-04-18 00:38:04 UTC
  2. 2013-04-18 08:38:04 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-04-17 19:38:04 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

24.840°N 123.019°E depth=10.8km (6.7mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 41km (25mi) N of Yonakuni, Japan
  2. 121km (75mi) ENE of Su’ao, Taiwan
  3. 127km (79mi) WNW of Ishigaki, Japan
  4. 128km (80mi) E of Yilan, Taiwan
  5. 947km (588mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Tectonic Summary

Seismotectonics of the Philippine Sea and Vicinity

The Philippine Sea plate is bordered by the larger Pacific and Eurasia plates and the smaller Sunda plate. The Philippine Sea plate is unusual in that its borders are nearly all zones of plate convergence. The Pacific plate is subducted into the mantle, south of Japan, beneath the Izu-Bonin and Mariana island arcs, which extend more than 3,000 km along the eastern margin of the Philippine Sea plate. This subduction zone is characterized by rapid plate convergence and high-level seismicity extending to depths of over 600 km. In spite of this extensive zone of plate convergence, the plate interface has been associated with few great (M>8.0) ‘megathrust’ earthquakes. This low seismic energy release is thought to result from weak coupling along the plate interface (Scholz and Campos, 1995). These convergent plate margins are also associated with unusual zones of back-arc extension (along with resulting seismic activity) that decouple the volcanic island arcs from the remainder of the Philippine Sea Plate (Karig et al., 1978; Klaus et al., 1992).

South of the Mariana arc, the Pacific plate is subducted beneath the Yap Islands along the Yap trench. The long zone of Pacific plate subduction at the eastern margin of the Philippine Sea Plate is responsible for the generation of the deep Izu-Bonin, Mariana, and Yap trenches as well as parallel chains of islands and volcanoes, typical of circum-pacific island arcs. Similarly, the northwestern margin of the Philippine Sea plate is subducting beneath the Eurasia plate along a convergent zone, extending from southern Honshu to the northeastern coast of Taiwan, manifested by the Ryukyu Islands and the Nansei-Shoto (Ryukyu) trench. The Ryukyu Subduction Zone is associated with a similar zone of back-arc extension, the Okinawa Trough. At Taiwan, the plate boundary is characterized by a zone of arc-continent collision, whereby the northern end of the Luzon island arc is colliding with the buoyant crust of the Eurasia continental margin offshore China.

Along its western margin, the Philippine Sea plate is associated with a zone of oblique convergence with the Sunda Plate. This highly active convergent plate boundary extends along both sides the Philippine Islands, from Luzon in the north to the Celebes Islands in the south. The tectonic setting of the Philippines is unusual in several respects: it is characterized by opposite-facing subduction systems on its east and west sides; the archipelago is cut by a major transform fault, the Philippine Fault; and the arc complex itself is marked by active volcanism, faulting, and high seismic activity. Subduction of the Philippine Sea Plate occurs at the eastern margin of the archipelago along the Philippine Trench and its northern extension, the East Luzon Trough. The East Luzon Trough is thought to be an unusual example of a subduction zone in the process of formation, as the Philippine Trench system gradually extends northward (Hamburger et al., 1983). On the west side of Luzon, the Sunda Plate subducts eastward along a series of trenches, including the Manila Trench in the north, the smaller less well-developed Negros Trench in the central Philippines, and the Sulu and Cotabato trenches in the south (Cardwell et al., 1980). At its northern and southern terminations, subduction at the Manila Trench is interrupted by arc-continent collision, between the northern Philippine arc and the Eurasian continental margin at Taiwan and between the Sulu-Borneo Block and Luzon at the island of Mindoro. The Philippine fault, which extends over 1,200 km within the Philippine arc, is seismically active. The fault has been associated with major historical earthquakes, including the destructive M7.6 Luzon earthquake of 1990 (Yoshida and Abe, 1992). A number of other active intra-arc fault systems are associated with high seismic activity, including the Cotabato Fault and the Verde Passage-Sibuyan Sea Fault (Galgana et al., 2007).

Relative plate motion vectors near the Philippines (about 80 mm/yr) is oblique to the plate boundary along the two plate margins of central Luzon, where it is partitioned into orthogonal plate convergence along the trenches and nearly pure translational motion along the Philippine Fault (Barrier et al., 1991). Profiles B and C reveal evidence of opposing inclined seismic zones at intermediate depths (roughly 70-300 km) and complex tectonics at the surface along the Philippine Fault.

Several relevant tectonic elements, plate boundaries and active volcanoes, provide a context for the seismicity presented on the main map. The plate boundaries are most accurate along the axis of the trenches and more diffuse or speculative in the South China Sea and Lesser Sunda Islands. The active volcanic arcs (Siebert and Simkin, 2002) follow the Izu, Volcano, Mariana, and Ryukyu island chains and the main Philippine islands parallel to the Manila, Negros, Cotabato, and Philippine trenches.

Seismic activity along the boundaries of the Philippine Sea Plate (Allen et al., 2009) has produced 7 great (M>8.0) earthquakes and 250 large (M>7) events. Among the most destructive events were the 1923 Kanto, the 1948 Fukui and the 1995 Kobe (Japan) earthquakes (99,000, 5,100, and 6,400 casualties, respectively), the 1935 and the 1999 Chi-Chi (Taiwan) earthquakes (3,300 and 2,500 casualties, respectively), and the 1976 M7.6 Moro Gulf and 1990 M7.6 Luzon (Philippines) earthquakes (7,100 and 2,400 casualties, respectively). There have also been a number of tsunami-generating events in the region, including the Moro Gulf earthquake, whose tsunami resulted in more than 5000 deaths.

More information on regional seismicity and tectonics

************************************************************************************************************************

 

Russian Scientist Predicts “Massive Earthquake” to Hit Japan by End of 2014

During the European Geosciences Union (EGU) Convention in Vienna on 9 April, a Russian scientist declared that Japan would face a giant earthquake of magnitude 9.0 within the next year and a half.

 

Alexei Ryubushin of the Schmidt Institute of the Physics of the Earth presented his findings which were arrived at from collecting low frequency seismic noise data through F-net.

F-net is a “full range seismograph network of Japan” which promotes earthquake research by providing high sensitivity seismic data, crustal deformation observations and other information which could be useful in monitoring the behavior of earthquakes.

During the convention he pointed out that there is still stress remaining on the crust following the Great Tohoku Earthquake of 2011. However, he predicts the next quake to take place in another location.

 

Read Full Article Here

Earth Watch Report  -  Biological Hazards

 

Image Source

Today Biological Hazard Taiwan County of Hualien, [The area was not defined.] Damage level Details

Biological Hazard in Taiwan on Sunday, 14 April, 2013 at 13:43 (01:43 PM) UTC.

Description
Specimens from a 4-year-old Chinese tourist who developed a fever in the eastern county of Hualien were delivered for testing for H7N9 avian influenza Sunday, health officials said that day. Chung Mei-chu, a secretary in the county’s Health Bureau, said the child, who arrived in Taiwan April 12 with his parents as independent tourists, was taken to the Mennonite Christian Hospital’s emergency room after developing a fever. Chung said the hospital activated its emergency disease prevention mechanism after the medical staff heard the family was from China’s eastern coastal province of Zhejiang, where 11 cases of H7N9 have been reported, including two deaths. The emergency room was temporarily closed to prevent other patients from coming into close contact with the child, she said, adding that the ER was later reopened after the child was referred to a fever-screening station in the hospital. Specimens from the child were collected and delivered to the Department of Health lab in Taipei for testing. If the tests are positive for the H7N9 virus, he will become the first confirmed case of H7N9 in Taiwan.
Biohazard name: H7N9 (highly pathogenic avian influenza (new subtype) – human infection)
Biohazard level: 4/4 Hazardous
Biohazard desc.: Viruses and bacteria that cause severe to fatal disease in humans, and for which vaccines or other treatments are not available, such as Bolivian and Argentine hemorrhagic fevers, H5N1(bird flu), Dengue hemorrhagic fever, Marburg virus, Ebola virus, hantaviruses, Lassa fever, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever, and other hemorrhagic or unidentified diseases. When dealing with biological hazards at this level the use of a Hazmat suit and a self-contained oxygen supply is mandatory. The entrance and exit of a Level Four biolab will contain multiple showers, a vacuum room, an ultraviolet light room, autonomous detection system, and other safety precautions designed to destroy all traces of the biohazard. Multiple airlocks are employed and are electronically secured to prevent both doors opening at the same time. All air and water service going to and coming from a Biosafety Level 4 (P4) lab will undergo similar decontamination procedures to eliminate the possibility of an accidental release.
Symptoms:
Status: suspected

H7N9 avian influenza outbreak in China

Chinese tourist brings H7N9 avian influenza to Taiwan

Chinese tourist brings H7N9 avian influenza to Taiwan
Image via focustaiwan.tw

 

Apr 14, 2013

TAIPEI, Taiwan – Specimens from a 4-year-old Chinese tourist who developed a fever in the eastern county of Hualien were delivered for testing for H7N9 avian influenza Sunday, health officials said that day.

Chung Mei-chu, a secretary in the county’s Health Bureau, said the child, who arrived in Taiwan April 12 with his parents as independent tourists, was taken to the Mennonite Christian Hospital’s emergency room after developing a fever.

Chung said the hospital activated its emergency disease prevention mechanism after the medical staff heard the family was from China’s eastern coastal province of Zhejiang, where 11 cases of H7N9 have been reported, including two deaths.

 

Read Full Article Here

Suspected H7N9 cases continue to increase in Taiwan

By Alison Hsiao  /  Staff reporter

The Central Epidemic Command Center said that four suspected H7N9 cases had been identified in the 24-hour period ending at 8am yesterday. It added that a boy from H7N9-affected Zhejiang Province in China, who was traveling with his parents, was said to have developed a fever in Hualien yesterday morning and that the emergency room he was sent to had been temporarily closed.

Two of the four cases were later determined not to be H7N9 infections.

According to the Central News Agency, the four-year-old boy was taken to the Mennonite Christian Hospital’s emergency room, and after it was discovered that the family came from an H7N9-affected region, the hospital closed the room for a short period to avoid possible contact with other patients.

Local health authorities said specimens obtained from the boy and his mother, who had not developed influenza-like symptoms, but has been the boy’s main care provider, had been sent to Taipei for testing. The boy and his mother were quarantined, but no restrictions were imposed on the boy’s father.

 

Read Full Article Here

Earth Watch Report  -  Earthquakes

TSMC Factories Evacuated After 6.1 Magnitude Quake Hits Taiwan              Image Source

6.0 21km SE of Buli, Taiwan 2013-03-27 02:03:20 23.840°N 121.135°E 20.7

M6.0 – 21km SE of Buli, Taiwan 2013-03-27 02:03:20 UTC

Earthquake location 23.840°N, 121.135°E

Event Time

  1. 2013-03-27 02:03:20 UTC
  2. 2013-03-27 10:03:20 UTC+08:00 at epicenter
  3. 2013-03-26 21:03:20 UTC-05:00 system time

Location

23.840°N 121.135°E depth=20.7km (12.9mi)

Nearby Cities

  1. 21km (13mi) SE of Buli, Taiwan
  2. 40km (25mi) ENE of Lugu, Taiwan
  3. 47km (29mi) ESE of Zhongxing New Village, Taiwan
  4. 48km (30mi) E of Nantou, Taiwan
  5. 735km (457mi) ENE of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Tectonic Summary

Seismotectonics of the Philippine Sea and Vicinity

The Philippine Sea plate is bordered by the larger Pacific and Eurasia plates and the smaller Sunda plate. The Philippine Sea plate is unusual in that its borders are nearly all zones of plate convergence. The Pacific plate is subducted into the mantle, south of Japan, beneath the Izu-Bonin and Mariana island arcs, which extend more than 3,000 km along the eastern margin of the Philippine Sea plate. This subduction zone is characterized by rapid plate convergence and high-level seismicity extending to depths of over 600 km. In spite of this extensive zone of plate convergence, the plate interface has been associated with few great (M>8.0) ‘megathrust’ earthquakes. This low seismic energy release is thought to result from weak coupling along the plate interface (Scholz and Campos, 1995). These convergent plate margins are also associated with unusual zones of back-arc extension (along with resulting seismic activity) that decouple the volcanic island arcs from the remainder of the Philippine Sea Plate (Karig et al., 1978; Klaus et al., 1992).

South of the Mariana arc, the Pacific plate is subducted beneath the Yap Islands along the Yap trench. The long zone of Pacific plate subduction at the eastern margin of the Philippine Sea Plate is responsible for the generation of the deep Izu-Bonin, Mariana, and Yap trenches as well as parallel chains of islands and volcanoes, typical of circum-pacific island arcs. Similarly, the northwestern margin of the Philippine Sea plate is subducting beneath the Eurasia plate along a convergent zone, extending from southern Honshu to the northeastern coast of Taiwan, manifested by the Ryukyu Islands and the Nansei-Shoto (Ryukyu) trench. The Ryukyu Subduction Zone is associated with a similar zone of back-arc extension, the Okinawa Trough. At Taiwan, the plate boundary is characterized by a zone of arc-continent collision, whereby the northern end of the Luzon island arc is colliding with the buoyant crust of the Eurasia continental margin offshore China.

Instrumental Intensity

ShakeMap Intensity Image

By Tim Culpan & Adela Lin – Mar 26, 2013 10:19 PM CT

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. evacuated factories after a magnitude 6.1 earthquake struck central Taiwan’s Nantou county at 10:03 a.m. Buildings shook in Taipei, about 153 kilometers from the epicenter.

The evacuations were triggered by emergency response mechanisms, company spokesman Michael Kramer told Bloomberg by phone today. A factory in the city of Taichung and another in Hsinchu were evacuated following the tremor, and both operate 8- inch wafer production equipment, he said.

Kuo Kai-wen, director of Seismology Center, speaks to the press at the central Weather Bureau in Taipei on March 27, 2013. A magnitude 6.1 earthquake struck central Taiwan’s Nantou county at 10:03 a.m. Photographer: Sam Yeh/AFP/Getty Images

The earthquake’s epicenter was 38.8 kilometers east of Nantou county’s government at a depth of 15.4 kilometers, Taiwan’s Central Weather Bureau reported. It was followed by three aftershocks measuring from 3.7 to 3.9 in magnitude. Three people were injured and one fire was reported in central Taiwan, Lin Kuan-cheng, a spokesman for the National Fire Agency said by phone today. Landslides blocked a highway in Nantou, the transportation department said.

The Taiwan dollar was unchanged at NT$29.850 as of 10:51 a.m. in Taipei trading. Taiwan’s Taiex rose 0.3 percent to 7,876.94 as of 10:54 a.m. local time.

The U.S. Geological Survey recorded the earthquake’s magnitude as 6.0 and occurring at a depth of 20 kilometers.

To contact the reporters on this story: Tim Culpan in Taipei at tculpan1@bloomberg.net; Adela Lin in Taipei at alin95@bloomberg.net

More News

Earth  Watch Report  -  Biological Hazards

English: The biological hazard risk symbol on ...

English: The biological hazard risk symbol on yellow background (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

….

08.12.2012 Biological Hazard Taiwan County of Penghu , [Penghu Island] Damage level
Details

….

Biological Hazard in Taiwan on Saturday, 08 December, 2012 at 16:12 (04:12 PM) UTC.

Description
Outlying Penghu Island has reported the first highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreak and all chickens on the affected farm have been destroyed, an official from the Council of Agriculture (COA) said Friday. Huang Kuo-ching, deputy director of the COA’s Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine, said the owner of the chicken farm first detected a massive die-off of 150 chickens Nov. 19 and alerted the health authorities. Another 50 chickens died the next day and test results obtained Nov. 22 showed that H5N2 was to blame, prompting the Penghu county government to order the surviving 431 chickens killed. According to scholars, the H5N2 virus is normally low pathogenic, but the latest outbreak was caused by a highly pathogenic strain that they said could be a mutation of the virus. Huang said the farmer had bought chickens at an auction in Chiayi Nov. 14 and speculated that the outbreak was caused by these birds. There are three other chickens farms around the affected one, but the bureau said it had detected no abnormalities so far, although it added that safety can only be assured after a three-month observation period.
Biohazard name: H5N2 (Low pathogenic avian inluenza)
Biohazard level: 2/4 Medium
Biohazard desc.: Bacteria and viruses that cause only mild disease to humans, or are difficult to contract via aerosol in a lab setting, such as hepatitis A, B, and C, influenza A, Lyme disease, salmonella, mumps, measles, scrapie, dengue fever, and HIV. “Routine diagnostic work with clinical specimens can be done safely at Biosafety Level 2, using Biosafety Level 2 practices and procedures. Research work (including co-cultivation, virus replication studies, or manipulations involving concentrated virus) can be done in a BSL-2 (P2) facility, using BSL-3 practices and procedures. Virus production activities, including virus concentrations, require a BSL-3 (P3) facility and use of BSL-3 practices and procedures”, see Recommended Biosafety Levels for Infectious Agents.
Symptoms:
Status: confirmed

….

 

….

Earth Watch Report

 

….

23.11.2012 Biological Hazard Taiwan East District, [Chiayi County] Damage level
Details

….

Biological Hazard in Taiwan on Friday, 23 November, 2012 at 14:45 (02:45 PM) UTC.

Description
Animal health officials have imposed a ban on the movement of chickens at a farm in southern Taiwan that has been found infected with low-pathogenic H5N2 avian influenza. Wong Yo-chu, director of the Chiayi County government’s Animal Disease Control Center, said his agency will not allow the 15,700 chickens at the farm in Puzih to be moved off the premises, but they will be kept alive. “As it was low-pathogenic, we will not cull the chickens,” Wong said, but the eggs laid by the chickens will have to be disinfected before they can be sold on the market. All 94 poultry farms within a 3-kilometer radius of the farm are being monitored, and no abnormal cases have been reported yet, Wong said. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine under the Council of Agriculture said Friday that it has filed a report of the Chiayi case with the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). Bureau officials also said that a farm with 800 chickens in outlying Penghu County reported the sudden death of 150 chickens on Nov. 19 and another 50 the following day. The farm was confirmed to have been infected with H5N2 virus Thursday. Animal health officials conducted a preventive cull and will monitor chicken farms within a 3-kilometer radius of the site for three months
Biohazard name: H5N2
Biohazard level: 2/4 Medium
Biohazard desc.: Bacteria and viruses that cause only mild disease to humans, or are difficult to contract via aerosol in a lab setting, such as hepatitis A, B, and C, influenza A, Lyme disease, salmonella, mumps, measles, scrapie, dengue fever, and HIV. “Routine diagnostic work with clinical specimens can be done safely at Biosafety Level 2, using Biosafety Level 2 practices and procedures. Research work (including co-cultivation, virus replication studies, or manipulations involving concentrated virus) can be done in a BSL-2 (P2) facility, using BSL-3 practices and procedures. Virus production activities, including virus concentrations, require a BSL-3 (P3) facility and use of BSL-3 practices and procedures”, see Recommended Biosafety Levels for Infectious Agents.
Symptoms:
Status: confirmed

….

 

….

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 729 other followers