兩岸醫藥衛生合作和疫苗研發採購：以新冠疫情為例

Abstract

新冠疫情於全球快速蔓延，在疫情爆發三個月後，全球確診數就已經超過十萬。在死亡人數急劇增加下，即時掌握疫情資訊就顯得相當重要。邱淑媞（2022，頁57）在《臺灣新冠疫情的衝擊與反思》一書中指出，根據世界衛生組織（World Health Organization，簡稱WHO）記錄， 2019年12月31日，在WHO中國辦公室向國際衛生條例（International Health Regulations，簡稱IHR）西太平洋區署駐點通報後，WHO立即採取系列處置，包含向會員國通報、提供疫情新聞報告、發布中國方面已經確認為新型冠狀病毒，並向各國提出系列指引方針。而中國大陸也在期間採取動作，將新型傳染病列為法定甲類傳染病，實施大規模的管控，包括封城、擴大檢驗、強制戴口罩等；我國政府，則在2020年1月23日，宣佈居住地為武漢者，禁止入境；為了解大陸採取何種防疫措施，WHO秘書長譚德塞（Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus）在1月27日、28日帶領高階代表團抵達北京拜訪國家主席習近平，1月30日，WHO在第二次國際衛生條例緊急會議後召開記者會，正式宣佈新型冠狀病毒疫情為國際重大公共衛生緊急事件，但當時並沒有將中國大陸所採取的封禁措施提供他國參考，包含封城、交通管制等系列公共衛生措施，甚至反對實施邊境管制。因此，在後續檢討聲浪中，被視為WHO的一大決策失誤（同上引，頁65）。

如探討疫情資訊的揭露程度，我國在世衛組織公布的資訊外，實則派出了專家訪團，訪陸時間比譚德塞率領之訪團早了兩週，台灣當局顯然有掌握即時資訊的渠道，卻持續表示取得資訊受阻。因此，本研究中於釐清造成資訊落差因素的過程中，將檢視兩岸現存的醫藥衛生合作機制如何發揮效用？同時，在我國疫苗採購過程中，持續出現大陸杯葛我國疫苗採購的質疑聲浪，我國在採購BNT疫苗，面臨的障礙是主權問題還是商業問題？我國未曾考慮進口陸製疫苗是國安疑慮，或是政府培植國產疫苗的商業考量？本研究將綜合檢視疫情資訊、疫苗資源的取得與疫情政策的制定等層面，進而對現存機制的不足之處，提出建議與補充。

The rapid global spread of COVID-19 saw confirmed cases exceed 100,000 within three months of the outbreak. With mortality rates escalating quickly, timely access to epidemic information became crucially important. According to records from the World Health Organization (WHO), on December 31, 2019, the WHO China Office notified the Western Pacific Regional Office under the International Health Regulations (IHR), triggering a series of actions by WHO including notifying member states, initiating epidemic news reports, and publishing guidelines after confirming the virus as a novel coronavirus. During this period, Mainland China classified this new infectious disease as a Class A communicable disease and implemented extensive control measures, such as city lockdowns, expanded testing, and mandatory mask-wearing. The ROC (Taiwan) government, on January 23, 2020, announced a ban on entry for residents from Wuhan. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus visited Beijing on January 27 and 28 to discuss China’s epidemic prevention measures with Xi Jinping. Following the second IHR Emergency Committee meeting on January 30, WHO held a press conference declaring the novel coronavirus outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) . However, at that time, WHO did not recommend that other countries adopt China’s public health measures, nor did it support the imposition of border controls, which was later regarded as a major oversight by WHO.

Regarding the transparency of epidemic information, Taiwan, in addition to the information released by WHO, had dispatched an expert delegation to Mainland China two weeks prior to Tedros' visit, indicating that the Taiwanese authorities had independent channels for obtaining timely information, yet continued to state that access to information was obstructed. This study will examine the role of existing cross-strait medical and health cooperation mechanisms in bridging the information gap. It also assesses the challenges faced by Taiwan in acquiring COVID-19 vaccines, exploring whether these challenges are related to sovereignty issues or commercial concerns, and whether the decision against importing Chinese-made vaccines was influenced by national security considerations or commercial motives to nurture domestic vaccine production. This research aims to comprehensively review the dissemination of epidemic information, vaccine acquisition, and the formulation of pandemic policies, proposing recommendations for addressing deficiencies in the current mechanisms.