北洋军阀政府行动迅速，上海6月出现疫情后，当月在北京就成立了中央防疫司，由卫生部长陈道仁出任总指挥。在当时军阀割据的中国，意外得到了各方响应。
那个时代中国根本没有现代医疗体系和药品，甚至没有口罩概念，基本由各地采用三封手段，即封路，封村和封户。在没有火化习惯和设备的情况下，各地也成立了深埋队，对去世的疑似病患立刻实行深埋处理。
然而由欧美专家主导的在被怀疑疫情重灾区的热河省的疫情调查中，只录得6000多病例，100多人死亡，死亡率仅2%, 这和英国法国德国10%到15%的死亡率相去甚远，也让人无法解释。上海一些英文报纸也承认租界外的华民远比租界内的洋人感染和死亡低很多。
当时中国疫情到底如何，现在还有争论，有些文献仍然归于统计不完全。但普遍的说法是北洋中央政府强有力的干预和各地军阀的配合是主要原因，甚至认为华人的拱手礼而不用西方贴面礼才避免了大规模感染发生。
(World Journal) 編譯林育正
國家過敏和傳染病研究院(NIAID)院長佛奇(Anthony Fauci)5日表示，美國的新冠肺炎疫情與其他國家相比「有過之而無不及」；堅信科學的他與川普總統立場相左，也導致家人被騷擾甚至受死亡威脅，女兒還需要專人保護。
全美目前已累積超過481萬人確診，逾15萬人死亡；佛奇5日在哈佛大學公衛論壇接受有線電視新聞網(CNN)首席醫療特派員古波塔(Dr. Sanjay Gupta)訪問。他說：「你看看感染和死亡的人數，真的非常讓人擔心。」
美國人口不到全世界的5%，新冠肺炎確診數和死亡卻占20-25%；古波塔提問，美國是不是世界上防疫最差的國家？佛奇的回答是肯定的，他說：「如果你從數據上來看，那的確是這樣沒錯，數字不會騙人。」
佛奇的立場讓許多支持川普總統的人非常憤怒，其家人也因此不堪其擾；他表示他和家人需要長期的維安保護。他說：「這讓你看到人性最美好和最陰暗的一面，家人收到死亡威脅，女兒遭受騷擾，甚至嚴重到需要動用維安人員的程度，太誇張了。」
「再怎麼瘋狂，我都無法想像民眾會反對公共衛生準則；這太奇怪了，因為這正是在對抗威脅你的病毒。」佛奇說，「現在在美國，出現了一種反科學的情緒。但這可能又與科學無關，反而是對權力的不信任。從某種角度來看，我們這些呈述資訊的科學家，就被認為是一種權勢人物」。
然而，川普認為疫情已獲掌控；包括白宮抗疫小組成員柏克斯(Deborah Birx)在內的專家則強調，疫情目前仍在鄉村和都會區蔓延。
川普3日接受Axios訪問，被問到美國每天上千人因新冠肺炎過世，他說：「事實就是這樣。但這不代表我們沒有盡一切努力，我們已經盡力控制。」
知情人士更透露，4日在白宮內部會議中，川普仍無法理解疫情的嚴重性；抗疫小組成員在會議中，無法說服總統積極看待疫情，總是被他扯到別的話題上。
(World Journal) 記者顏伶如
川普接受記者訪問時，每當面臨棘手問題，往往顧左右而言他。然而，如果採訪地點在室外，旁邊有著嚨嚨作響的直升機，這個事實很容易就被掩蓋，川普接受福斯新聞網挺川主播漢尼提(Sean Hannity)訪問時，則不必擔心會有尷尬場面出現。
然而，史旺的訪問則不一樣，川普沒有閃躲餘地。透過史旺訪問，觀眾看到川普面對並不尖銳的提問，也都找不到藉口可為自己的施政辯護。
史旺訪問川普的兩周之前，資深主播華勒斯(Chris Wallace)在「福斯周日新聞」(Fox News Sunday)專訪川普時，對於川普回答出現漏洞或與事實不符之處隨時指正，獲得網友一致叫好。
史旺對川普提出一連串詢問，質疑川普為何沒有為打擊新冠病毒疫情做得更多？為何美國疫情會比其他國家更為慘重？
關於民眾對於病毒檢測抱怨連連，例如等候多時才收得到檢測報告，讓檢測結果形同無用，川普則開始隨口瞎扯，聲稱「有些人說我們做太多檢測了。」
史旺追問：「哪些人說的？」川普則說：「去看手冊，去看書。」史旺再問：「什麼書呢？」川普則沒有回答。
話鋒一轉，川普把苗頭指向前朝歐巴馬政府，說道：「當我們接下政權的時候，我們手邊根本沒有檢測。」
面對川普企圖甩鍋給歐巴馬政府，史旺馬上說，新冠病毒疫情在歐巴馬任內還沒發生，疫情是在川普就職典禮約三年之後才出現。
如同接受華勒斯專訪時一樣，川普接受史旺訪問時，再度拿出幾張印有數據圖表的紙張，企圖說服史旺，美國高達15萬的染疫死亡人數，其實沒有那麼嚴重。
川普隨口指稱，紙張上的統計顯示「美國是全球最低的」，對於史旺追問「什麼項目？全球最低？」川普卻結結巴巴，說不出所以然。
史旺好不容易搞清楚川普引述資料是確診患者的死亡率，立即對川普說道，應該要看整體人口的染疫死亡率，才能呈現美國疫情的嚴重性，了解美國比南韓、德國的狀況都更糟糕，因為南韓人口有5000萬，染疫死亡僅300人。
川普並未正面回答史旺問題，反而質疑南韓「捏造數字」，等到史旺詢問有何根據時，川普又把話題轉回紙張上的資料，堅稱美國是「全球最低的」，「意思就是我們的表現是全球第一！」
8/04/2020 (World Journal) 記者胡玉立  「主要就是因為有些人太自私」，不戴口罩，以致新冠病毒四處傳播，疫情難退。圖為在密西西比州的一家餐館員工正在消毒餐館。(美聯社)  美國至今至少15萬6668人因新冠肺炎死亡，確診總數並快速逼近500萬例大關，確診和死亡人數均是全球第一；佛羅里達大學流行病學家辛蒂·普林斯(Cindy Prins)說：「新冠病毒目前在美國傳播極廣，美國人受感染可能性越來越大。對許多人來說，這是一種『行為疾病』；預防之道是改變行為，但對人類來說這真的很難，我們是社交動物。」 大型家庭聚會、婚禮、擁擠的酒吧和餐館，不戴口罩的人比比皆是；許多人抵制口罩、不遵守安全距離，聲稱這種預防措施反應過度或侵犯自由。 公衛專家說，政客領導混亂，地方、州和聯邦政府遏制疫情作法雜亂無章，讓問題更加複雜。 杜克大學全球健康研究所專家奎克(Jonathan Quick)說：「最讓人氣結的是，有這麼多國家、這麼多州向美國人展示新冠病毒可以如何控制。我們不是不知道什麼方法可以奏效。」 全球新冠肺炎確診累計逾1844萬例，死亡近70萬人；美國確診逾476萬例，死亡超過15萬6668人；而且過去兩周來，美國單日死亡人數從780人增至1056人，每天新增確診逾6萬例。 維吉尼亞州在一些城市出現確診激增後，州長諾譚(Ralph Northam)限制當地酒類銷售和至多50人聚會，並指年輕人染疫增加，問題出在「太多自私的人」。 諾譚說：「我們都知道酒精會改變人的判斷力。幾杯下肚後，就不太在乎社交距離了。病毒就在那時傳播開來。」 麻州正在調查至少六起群聚感染案，包括救生員聚會、高中畢業舞會、未經批准的足球營和擁擠的港口遊輪之旅等。 其中，鱈魚角(Cape Cod)一場家庭聚會導致十多人確診；春田市(Springfield)一家醫院也在處理40多人的群聚感染案，一名從外州度假回來的員工把病毒傳給共進午餐的其他同事。 在鄉下人口稀少且有大量戶外空間，仍爆發疫情；南達科他州黑丘(Black Hills)一個基督教青年夏令營參加活動的328人有96人染疫；威斯康辛州確診至少5萬6056例，近四分之一是過去14天出現，大多在人口稠密的東南角，但北部農村和人口稀少地區也以驚人速度傳播。 7/02/2020
7月1日，《每日邮报》及全球多家媒体报道了一个发生在印度的悲剧：一位26岁软件工程师在已表现出严重新冠肺炎症状的情况下，吃药降温举行婚礼，新郎在婚礼两天后死亡，随后亲属又为他举行了葬礼，参加婚礼与葬礼者共有111人已被确认感染新冠病毒。 据比哈尔邦首席医疗官拉吉·基舍尔·乔杜里（Raj Kishor Chaudhary）向法新社记者证实，这名工程师的婚礼与葬礼导致了新冠疫情的聚集爆发，参加婚礼及葬礼者中，截至目前为止已有111人新冠病毒检测结果为阳性，有400余人处在隔离状态。 由于新郎的家人早早地火化了小哥的遗体，印度医疗部门没能对新郎进行尸检，也就无从肯定地判断新郎就是该次新冠感染聚集爆发的传染源。 关于新娘是否感染在媒体中有两种说法，法新社报道中称官方宣布，新郎的亲属中包括新娘在内无人感染；《每日邮报》却称病毒检测结果为阳性的111人中包括新婚妻子。 为防止疫情扩散，印度要求婚礼最多只能邀请50名客人，葬礼则宾客数需限制在20人以下。这位不幸的码农小哥婚礼宾客数超300人，葬礼参加者超200人，已违反印度的防疫规定。 9/22/2019 By Quianae 第一、历史上没有起义成功改天换地的案例，他们的历史都被自己遗忘了，不管历史上有没有成功的案例，在他们的意识中从来就没有这个选项。 第二、几个大的宗教统治了人们的思维，并且彻底改造了思维方式，宗教把人引导到追求来生这种虚幻的思路上，彻底斩断了人们探索造反这种系统工程的可能性。 第三、宗教组织太过强大，让其他组织生长发育的空间变的极小。 第四，即便有组织产生，他们在现实的社会上也寻找不到改变和治理社会的知识。他们没有知识储备。 第五、 就全世界来说，中国文化中这种起义的根深蒂固的传统，都是独有的，推翻统治者，从新建立国家在全世界都是罕见的。 第六，中国独有的世俗文化，本质上相信人能够创造自己的命运，而在宗教占统治地位的地区，连这一点都很难做到。 如果你在印度，你也没有办法起义，给贵族磕头，你有50%的生存概率，选择反抗，你100%会死。长此以往，只有会磕头的能留下后代。  Academic Enrichment Programs for 1st - 8th Grade Students Join Us To Be Elite Tel: 571-217-2357  SAT/PSAT, AP Calculus/AP Physics, College Essay, TJ Prep 9/22/2019 The Indian Rebellion of 1857 was a major, but ultimately unsuccessful, uprising in India in 1857–58 against the rule of the British East India Company, which functioned as a sovereign power on behalf of the British Crown.[4][5] The rebellion began on 10 May 1857 in the form of a mutiny of sepoys of the Company's army in the garrison town of Meerut, 40 mi (64 km) northeast of Delhi (now Old Delhi). It then erupted into other mutinies and civilian rebellions chiefly in the upper Gangetic plain and central India,[a][6][b][7] though incidents of revolt also occurred farther north and east.[c][8] The rebellion posed a considerable threat to British power in that region,[d][9] and was contained only with the rebels' defeat inGwalior on 20 June 1858.[10] On 1 November 1858, the British granted amnesty to all rebels not involved in murder, though they did not declare the hostilities to have formally ended until 8 July 1859. The rebellion is known by many names, including the Sepoy Mutiny, the Indian Mutiny, the Great Rebellion, the Revolt of 1857, the Indian Insurrection, and the First War of Independence.[e][11] The Indian rebellion was fed by resentments born of diverse perceptions, including invasive British-style social reforms, harsh land taxes, summary treatment of some rich landowners and princes,[12][13] as well as scepticism about the improvements brought about by British rule.[f][14] Many Indians rose against the British; however, many also fought for the British, and the majority remained seemingly compliant to British rule.[g][14] Violence, which sometimes betrayed exceptional cruelty, was inflicted on both sides, on British officers, and civilians, including women and children, by the rebels, and on the rebels, and their supporters, including sometimes entire villages, by British reprisals; the cities of Delhi and Lucknow were laid waste in the fighting and the British retaliation.[h][14] After the outbreak of the mutiny in Meerut, the rebels very quickly reached Delhi, whose 81-year-oldMughal ruler, Bahadur Shah Zafar, they declared the Emperor of Hindustan. Soon, the rebels had also captured large tracts of the North-Western Provinces and Awadh (Oudh). The East India Company's response came rapidly as well. With help from reinforcements, Kanpur was retaken by mid-July 1857, and Delhi by the end of September.[10] However, it then took the remainder of 1857 and the better part of 1858 for the rebellion to be suppressed in Jhansi, Lucknow, and especially the Awadh countryside.[10]Other regions of Company controlled India—Bengal province, the Bombay Presidency, and the Madras Presidency—remained largely calm.[i][7][10] In the Punjab, the Sikh princes crucially helped the British by providing both soldiers and support.[j][7][10] The large princely states, Hyderabad, Mysore, Travancore, and Kashmir, as well as the smaller ones of Rajputana, did not join the rebellion, serving the British, in theGovernor-General Lord Canning's words, as "breakwaters in a storm."[15] In some regions, most notably in Awadh, the rebellion took on the attributes of a patriotic revolt against European oppression.[16] However, the rebel leaders proclaimed no articles of faith that presaged a newpolitical system.[k][17] Even so, the rebellion proved to be an important watershed in Indian- and British Empire history.[l][11][18] It led to the dissolution of the East India Company, and forced the British to reorganize the army, the financial system, and the administration in India, through passage of theGovernment of India Act 1858.[19] India was thereafter administered directly by the British government in the new British Raj.[15] On 1 November 1858, Queen Victoria issued a proclamation to Indians, which while lacking the authority of a constitutional provision,[m][20] promised rights similar to those of other British subjects.[n][o][21] In the following decades, when admission to these rights was not always forthcoming, Indians were to pointedly refer to the Queen's proclamation in growing avowals of a new nationalism.[p][22][q][23] East India Company's expansion in IndiaAlthough the British East India Company had established a presence in India as far back as 1612,[24] and earlier administered the factory areas established for trading purposes, its victory in the Battle of Plassey in 1757 marked the beginning of its firm foothold in eastern India. The victory was consolidated in 1764 at the Battle of Buxar, when the East India Company army defeated Mughal Emperor Shah Alam II. After his defeat, the emperor granted the Company the right to the "collection of Revenue" in the provinces of Bengal (modern day Bengal, Bihar, and Odisha), known as "Diwani" to the Company.[25] The Company soon expanded its territories around its bases in Bombay and Madras; later, the Anglo-Mysore Wars (1766–1799) and the Anglo-Maratha Wars (1772–1818) led to control of even more of India.[26] In 1806, the Vellore Mutiny was sparked by new uniform regulations that created resentment amongst both Hindu andMuslim sepoys.[27]  Offering serious and challenging mathematics to intellectually gifted students After the turn of the 19th century, Governor-General Wellesley began what became two decades of accelerated expansion of Company territories.[28] This was achieved either by subsidiary alliances between the Company and local rulers or by direct military annexation. The subsidiary alliances created the princely states of the Hindu maharajas and the Muslim nawabs. Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, and Kashmir were annexed after the Second Anglo-Sikh War in 1849; however, Kashmir was immediately sold under the 1846 Treaty of Amritsar to the Dogra Dynasty ofJammu and thereby became a princely state. The border dispute between Nepal and British India, which sharpened after 1801, had caused the Anglo-Nepalese War of 1814–16 and brought the defeated Gurkhas under British influence. In 1854, Berar was annexed, and the state of Oudh was added two years later. For practical purposes, the Company was the government of much of India.[29] Principal,  Licensed in MD, VA, DC, PA , DE, NC, SC, FL WeChat ID: sunnychenyuqing NMLS # 1220187 The Indian Rebellion of 1857 occurred as the result of an accumulation of factors over time, rather than any single event. The sepoys were Indian soldiers who were recruited into the Company's army. Just before the rebellion, there were over 300,000 sepoys in the army, compared to about 50,000 British. The forces were divided into three presidency armies: Bombay, Madras, and Bengal. The Bengal Army recruited highercastes, such as Rajputs and Bhumihar, mostly from the Awadh and Bihar regions, and even restricted the enlistment of lower castes in 1855. In contrast, theMadras Army and Bombay Army were "more localized, caste-neutral armies" that "did not prefer high-caste men".[30] The domination of higher castes in the Bengal Army has been blamed in part for initial mutinies that led to the rebellion. In 1772, when Warren Hastings was appointed India's first Governor-General, one of his first undertakings was the rapid expansion of the Company's army. Since the sepoys from Bengal – many of whom had fought against the Company in the Battles of Plassey and Buxar – were now suspect in British eyes, Hastings recruited farther west from the high-caste rural Rajputs and Bhumihar of Awadh and Bihar, a practice that continued for the next 75 years. However, in order to forestall any social friction, the Company also took action to adapt its military practices to the requirements of their religious rituals. Consequently, these soldiers dined in separate facilities; in addition, overseas service, considered polluting to their caste, was not required of them, and the army soon came officially to recognise Hindu festivals. "This encouragement of high caste ritual status, however, left the government vulnerable to protest, even mutiny, whenever the sepoys detected infringement of their prerogatives."[31] Stokes argues that "The British scrupulously avoided interference with the social structure of the village community which remained largely intact."[32] After the annexation of Oudh (Awadh) by the East India Company in 1856, many sepoys were disquieted both from losing their perquisites, as landed gentry, in the Oudh courts, and from the anticipation of any increased land-revenue payments that the annexation might bring about.[33] Other historians have stressed that by 1857, some Indian soldiers, interpreting the presence of missionaries as a sign of official intent, were convinced that the Company was masterminding mass conversions of Hindus and Muslims to Christianity.[34]Although earlier in the 1830s, evangelicals such as William Carey and William Wilberforce had successfully clamoured for the passage of social reform, such as the abolition of sati and allowing the remarriage of Hindu widows, there is little evidence that the sepoys' allegiance was affected by this.[33] However, changes in the terms of their professional service may have created resentment. As the extent of the East India Company's jurisdiction expanded with victories in wars or annexation, the soldiers were now expected not only to serve in less familiar regions, such as in Burma, but also to make do without the "foreign service" remuneration that had previously been their due.[35] A major cause of resentment that arose ten months prior to the outbreak of the rebellion was the General Service Enlistment Act of 25 July 1856. As noted above, men of the Bengal Army had been exempted from overseas service. Specifically, they were enlisted only for service in territories to which they could march. Governor-General Lord Dalhousie saw this as an anomaly, since all sepoys of the Madras and Bombay Armies and the six "General Service" battalions of the Bengal Army had accepted an obligation to serve overseas if required. As a result, the burden of providing contingents for active service in Burma, readily accessible only by sea, and China had fallen disproportionately on the two smaller Presidency Armies. As signed into effect by Lord Canning, Dalhousie's successor as Governor-General, the act required only new recruits to the Bengal Army to accept a commitment for general service. However, serving high-caste sepoys were fearful that it would be eventually extended to them, as well as preventing sons following fathers into an army with a strong tradition of family service.[36] There were also grievances over the issue of promotions, based on seniority. This, as well as the increasing number of European officers in the battalions,[37]made promotion slow, and many Indian officers did not reach commissioned rank until they were too old to be effective.[38]  The Enfield rifle[edit]The final spark was provided by the ammunition for the new Enfield P-53 rifle.[39] These rifles, which fired Minié balls, had a tighter fit than the earlier muskets, and used paper cartridges that came pre-greased. To load the rifle, sepoys had to bite the cartridge open to release the powder.[40] The grease used on these cartridges was rumoured to include tallow derived from beef, which would be offensive to Hindus,[41] and pork, which would be offensive to Muslims. At least one Company official pointed out the difficulties this may cause: However, in August 1856, greased cartridge production was initiated at Fort William, Calcutta, following a British design. The grease used included tallow supplied by the Indian firm of Gangadarh Banerji & Co.[43] By January, rumours were abroad that the Enfield cartridges were greased with animal fat. Company officers became aware of the rumours through reports of an altercation between a high-caste sepoy and a low-caste labourer at Dum Dum.[44] The labourer had taunted the sepoy that by biting the cartridge, he had himself lost caste, although at this time such cartridges had been issued only at Meerut and not at Dum Dum.[45] There had been rumours that the British sought to destroy the religions of the Indian people, and forcing the native soldiers to break their sacred code would have certainly added to this rumour, as it apparently did. The Company was quick to reverse the effects of this policy in hopes that the unrest would be quelled.[46][47] On 27 January, Colonel Richard Birch, the Military Secretary, ordered that all cartridges issued from depots were to be free from grease, and that sepoys could grease them themselves using whatever mixture "they may prefer".[48] A modification was also made to the drill for loading so that the cartridge was torn with the hands and not bitten. This however, merely caused many sepoys to be convinced that the rumours were true and that their fears were justified. Additional rumours started that the paper in the new cartridges, which was glazed and stiffer than the previously used paper, was impregnated with grease.[49]In February, a court of inquiry was held at Barrackpore to get to the bottom of these rumours. Native soldiers called as witnesses complained of the paper "being stiff and like cloth in the mode of tearing", said that when the paper was burned it smelled of grease, and announced that the suspicion that the paper itself contained grease could not be removed from their minds.[50]  Civilian disquiet[edit]The civilian rebellion was more multifarious. The rebels consisted of three groups: the feudal nobility, rural landlords called taluqdars, and the peasants. The nobility, many of whom had lost titles and domains under the Doctrine of Lapse, which refused to recognise the adopted children of princes as legal heirs, felt that the Company had interfered with a traditional system of inheritance. Rebel leaders such as Nana Sahib and the Rani of Jhansi belonged to this group; the latter, for example, was prepared to accept East India Company supremacy if her adopted son was recognised as her late husband's heir.[51] In other areas of central India, such as Indore and Saugar, where such loss of privilege had not occurred, the princes remained loyal to the Company, even in areas where the sepoys had rebelled.[52] The second group, the taluqdars, had lost half their landed estates to peasant farmers as a result of the land reforms that came in the wake of annexation of Oudh. As the rebellion gained ground, the taluqdars quickly reoccupied the lands they had lost, and paradoxically, in part because of ties of kinship and feudal loyalty, did not experience significant opposition from the peasant farmers, many of whom joined the rebellion, to the great dismay of the British.[53] It has also been suggested that heavy land-revenue assessment in some areas by the British resulted in many landowning families either losing their land or going into great debt to money lenders, and providing ultimately a reason to rebel; money lenders, in addition to the Company, were particular objects of the rebels' animosity.[54] The civilian rebellion was also highly uneven in its geographic distribution, even in areas of north-central India that were no longer under British control. For example, the relatively prosperous Muzaffarnagar district, a beneficiary of a Company irrigation scheme, and next door to Meerut, where the upheaval began, stayed relatively calm throughout.[55] "Utilitarian and evangelical-inspired social reform",[56] including the abolition of sati[57][58] and the legalisation of widow remarriage were considered by many—especially the British themselves[59]—to have caused suspicion that Indian religious traditions were being "interfered with", with the ultimate aim of conversion.[59][60] Recent historians, including Chris Bayly, have preferred to frame this as a "clash of knowledges", with proclamations from religious authorities before the revolt and testimony after it including on such issues as the "insults to women", the rise of "low persons under British tutelage", the "pollution" caused by Western medicine and the persecuting and ignoring of traditional astrological authorities.[61] European-run schools were also a problem: according to recorded testimonies, anger had spread because of stories that mathematics was replacing religious instruction, stories were chosen that would "bring contempt" upon Indian religions, and because girl children were exposed to "moral danger" by education.[61] The justice system was considered to be inherently unfair to the Indians. The official Blue Books, East India (Torture) 1855–1857, laid before the House of Commons during the sessions of 1856 and 1857, revealed that Company officers were allowed an extended series of appeals if convicted or accused of brutality or crimes against Indians. The economic policies of the East India Company were also resented by many Indians.[62] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Rebellion_of_1857 |  ALL-IN-ONE ONLINE REGISTRATION SOFTWARE        Principal,  Tel: (301)906-6889; (240)912-6290 Licensed in MD, VA, DC, WV, PA, DE, NC, SC, FL WeChat ID: sunnychenyuqing NMLS # 1220187 President, Principal Loan Consultant, Leader Funding, Inc.  电话: (240) 784-6645 Rockville, MD Phone: 301-366-3497  |
