Our Mission is to keep our audience with an interrupted stream of selected financial information from different serious sources, with the objective to provide online tools with information about investments in the financial markets. We supply you, with the following information: Asia Markets Closing Report, Europe Markets Closing Report, Wall Street Market Closing Report, Market News, Commodities Daily Price Report, Daily Treasury Yields Report, EU/FX Daily Report.
Experts
are revising their views on the best methods to detect infections,
setting aside long-held standards so that the spread of the virus can be
more quickly tracked and contained.
Credit...Avishek Das/SOPA Images/ZUMA Wire, via Alamy
For
months, the call for coronavirus testing has been led by one resounding
refrain: To keep outbreaks under control, doctors and researchers need
to deploy the most accurate tests available — ones reliable enough to
root out as many infections as possible, even in the absence of
symptoms.
That’s long been the dogma of infectious disease
diagnostics, experts say, since it helps ensure that cases won’t be
missed. During this pandemic, that has meant relying heavily on PCR
testing, an extremely accurate but time- and labor-intensive method that
requires samples to be processed at laboratories.
But as the virus continues its rampage across the country and tests remain in short supply
in many regions, researchers and public health experts have grown
increasingly vocal about revising this long-held credo. The best chance
to rein in the sprawling outbreaks in the United States now, experts
say, requires widespread adoption of less accurate tests, as long as
they’re administered quickly and often enough.
“Even
if you miss somebody on Day 1,” said Omai Garner, director of clinical
microbiology in the U.C.L.A. Health System. “If you test them
repeatedly, the argument is, you’ll catch them the next time around.”
This
quantity-over-quality strategy has its downsides, and is contingent on
an enormous supply of testing kits. But many experts believe more rapid,
frequent testing would identify those who need immediate medical care —
and perhaps even pinpoint those at greatest risk of spreading the
disease.
Such a considerable shift would likely be a welcome
change for a country where the status quo of testing was just described
as “unacceptable, period” by Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in an interview
Wednesday on CNN.
“If you had asked me this a couple months ago, I
would have said we just need to be doing the PCR tests,” said Susan
Butler-Wu, a clinical microbiologist at the University of Southern
California. “But we are so far gone in this country. It is a
catastrophe. It’s kitchen sink time, even if the tests are imperfect.”
Of
the dozens of coronavirus tests that have been granted emergency use
authorization by the Food and Drug Administration, most rely on complex
laboratory procedures, like PCR, to detect the coronavirus’s genetic
material.
Only a handful are quick and simple enough to be run in
what is called a point-of-care setting, like a doctor’s office or urgent
care clinic, without the need for lab equipment. And these tests are
still relatively scarce nationwide. Government officials have pledged to
astronomically scale up the number of point-of-care tests by fall, increasing by millions the weekly tally of tests conducted.
But
many of the rapid tests at the center of this buzz still rely on
specialized machines that are neither cheap nor easy to produce in bulk.
And while some rapid tests, like the Abbott ID Now, were quickly adopted into the White House, most are unlikely to get much play in the larger community.
“We
can’t have these in every household,” said Michael Mina, an
epidemiologist at Harvard University’s School of Public Health and a vocal proponent of speedy testing.
Image
Credit...Carlos Osorio/Associated Press
A
better option, Dr. Mina said, might be antigen testing, which
identifies pieces of protein. Two such tests, made by BD and Quidel,
have received emergency authorization from the F.D.A. Both require
instruments to run, but even simpler versions of this technology could
provide a fast answer in the same way as pregnancy tests, allowing users
to swab their mouths or noses or spit into a tube, then read the
results as colored bars on a strip of paper within minutes.
These
tests could be done at a doctor’s office, or even at home — no fancy
machines or specially trained personnel required — and cost just a few
dollars a pop, perhaps even less. And there would be no delays of a week
or longer. Companies like the Massachusetts-based E25Bio are currently
cooking up tests that might fit this need.
Such convenient setups could resolve some of the supply shortages that have plagued testing laboratories across the nation for months
and caused a national embarrassment over inadequate, inaccessible
testing. In many cities, people are still experiencing turnaround times
of over a week, sometimes three or more — as people did at the beginning
of the U.S. epidemics — for results from PCR-based tests, effectively
rendering them useless for themselves and the people around them.
Hamstrung by a long delay, even an accurate test can morph into a useless one.
Natalie
Magnus, who got tested in Winnebago County, Ill., on July 14, still
didn’t have results 22 days later. Her brother and sister-in-law, who
were each tested twice at separate facilities in Colorado on July 7 and
July 8, have so far received only one set of results after a 17-day
wait. One of them was positive for the coronavirus.
Ms.
Magnus, who has already completed a two-week quarantine at home, no
longer cares if she gets her results. “By now, that doesn’t tell me
anything,” she said.
Antigen tests, on the other hand, can be
low-tech and easy to manufacture en masse. Distributed weekly or even
daily, they could painlessly screen people headed back into offices,
schools and universities, delivering peace of mind to parents, teachers
and employers. Everyone — not just those feeling ill — would have an
easier way to assess their health status on a regular basis.
“The
goal here is to detect as many infections as possible,” said Daniel
Larremore, an applied mathematician who models infectious diseases at
the University of Colorado, Boulder. “That means taking as many shots on
goal as we can.”
Broad distribution of antigen tests might also
ease the demand for PCR, which still has an important role in hospitals
and vulnerable communities like nursing homes. As things stand, many
doctors still can’t get their patients’ results within 24 hours.
In
those settings, accuracy is crucial, said Melissa Miller, director of
the Clinical Molecular Microbiology Laboratory for U.N.C. Hospitals.
“You don’t want to miss that diagnosis.”
There are drawbacks.
Antigen tests will miss some people who would test positive by PCR,
which amplifies coronavirus RNA and picks up even tiny amounts of it.
With antigen tests, proteins can’t be copied in the same way, making it
easier to mistake some people who are carrying minute levels of the
coronavirus in their bodies as pathogen-free. Some antigen tests used in
the past miss up to half the infections they look for.
Early
on, many experts balked because of these shortcomings. “As
laboratorians, we wanted the most sensitive test, the most specific
test, the most accurate test,” Dr. Miller said. “End of story.”
But Dr. Mina argues that false negatives might not be as bad as they seem.
Virus
levels vary from person to person, and can wax and wane in an
individual over the course of an infection, typically peaking around the
time symptoms first appear. People carrying — and thus probably
shedding — gobs of germs will most likely turn up positive using every
test on the market, Dr. Mina said. Those harboring less virus in their
bodies might get more mixed results. Many of these individuals, however,
probably aren’t the cases of most concern.
It’s another way to look at testing accuracy, Dr. Mina said: “Detecting the most infectious people.”
Image
Credit...Joe Raedle/Getty Images
A
testing rethink this substantial will inevitably come with snags. The
success of the speedy testing strategy hinges heavily on availability —
something the United States has utterly failed at since the virus first
made landfall within its borders. Ramping up antigen testing may only
add strain to an already sputtering supply chain, potentially hampering
plans for widespread use.
“If you test people all the time, you
can account for lack of sensitivity,” Dr. Butler-Wu said. “But are you
really going to test people all the time? If the answer is no, then that
lack of sensitivity becomes more of a big deal.”
And many experts
are still hesitant to trust negative antigen results, which may need to
be backed up with a more sensitive test. That might not be very
burdensome in the midst of an outbreak, when positivity rates are likely
to be high, Dr. Babady said. In spots where infection rates are
especially low, however, “that is not going to be the best approach to
testing,” she said.
Cheap tests also aren’t the same thing as free
tests. Even $1 tests can start to rack up quite a bill, especially for
large families hoping to do daily checkups or nursing home aides required to get tested repeatedly.
Left unregulated, the testing market could end up exacerbating the
socioeconomic split that’s already disproportionately burdened some
sectors of the population with the worst effects of Covid-19.
Concerns
over accuracy bogged down the approval process for simple, speedy
tests. F.D.A. guidelines stipulate that any new coronavirus test vying
for emergency clearance from the agency must perform nearly as well as the gold standard of PCR.
The
F.D.A.’s rules frustrate Dr. Mina, who noted that several companies on
the verge of debuting antigen tests have found the regulatory hurdles
daunting. “Many of them are not even bothering,” he said. “‘Our product
might not be good enough. So what’s the point?’”
That’s
left the onus on the few companies who already have the F.D.A.’s green
light. In hopes of encouraging a speedier, ramped up production, the
governors of seven states announced this week a joint bid to purchase a total of 3.5 million antigen tests from BD and Quidel.
There
probably isn’t one way to grapple with all these issues — and certainly
not an obvious one, Dr. Butler-Wu said. What’s clear to her and others,
though, is that the current situation is untenable.
“Our backs are against the wall, and it’s Hail Mary time,” Dr. Butler-Wu said. “We have to try something different.”
Take a look at some of the biggest movers in the premarket: Hilton Worldwide
(HLT) – The hotel operator lost 61 cents per share for the second
quarter, wider than the 31 cents a share loss that Wall Street analysts
had been anticipating. Revenue was also below estimates, with Hilton
suffering from the pandemic-induced drop in travel demand. Restaurant Brands (QSR) – The parent of Tim Hortons, Burger King and Popeyes earned 33 cents per share
for its latest quarter, 4 cents a share above estimates. Revenue also
beat Wall Street forecasts. The company said it was back to about 90% of
the prior year’s systemwide sales by the end of the quarter. Bausch Health
(BHC) – The company plans to spin off its Bausch & Lomb eye care
unit into a separate publicly traded company. Bausch said it was taking
the action to unlock unrecognized value in the eye care business. Kontoor Brands
(KTB) – The maker of Lee and Wrangler jeans reported a quarterly loss
of 22 cents per share, compared to a consensus estimate of a 40 cents
per share loss. Revenue was above estimates, with the company saying it
was in good financial position despite the short-term negative impact of
the pandemic. ViacomCBS
(VIAC) – The media company reported quarterly profit of $1.25 per
share, beating the 95 cents a share consensus estimate. Revenue came in
above forecasts as well. ViacomCBS pointed to rapid growth in its
streaming business and said it is successfully managing through the
effects of the pandemic. Rocket Companies (RKT) – The parent of Quicken Loans makes its Wall Street debut today, after pricing its IPO at a lower-than-expected $18 per share and selling fewer shares than anticipated. Bristol-Myers (BMY), Pfizer
(PFE) – Bristol-Myers and Pfizer won a key patent case involving the
blood thinner Eliquis, with a judge ruling that drug companies
Sigmapharm, Sunshine Lake Pharma, and Unichem had infringed the
product’s patents. Bristol and Pfizer have a profit-sharing agreement
involving Eliquis. Separately, Bristol-Myers beat estimates for both
earnings and revenue for its latest quarter, and raised its full-year
forecast based on expectations of greater use of its drugs in hospitals
as delayed medical procedures are carried out. Sonos
(SONO) – Sonos saw quarterly sales beat Wall Street expectations, as
the high-end speaker maker shifted its focus to digital sales amid
pandemic-related store closures. Sonos did, however, report an overall
loss for the quarter. Live Nation
(LYV) – Live Nation reported a quarterly loss of $2.67 per share, wider
than the loss of $2.08 predicted by Wall Street analysts. The live
event promoter also saw revenue come in well below estimates, with the
pandemic virtually eliminating large gatherings and events. Roku (ROKU) – Roku lost 35 cents per share
for its latest quarter, smaller than the 50 cents a share loss that
analysts had anticipated. Revenue also beat forecasts, but the shares
have come under pressure after the streaming video device maker said
advertising industry uncertainty will persist through the third and
fourth quarters. Zynga
(ZNGA) – Zynga raised its full-year bookings forecast, after
better-than-expected quarterly results. The digital game maker got a
pandemic-related boost from increased engagement by players stuck at
home during the pandemic. Etsy
(ETSY) – Etsy reported quarterly profit of 75 cents per share, well
above the 39 cents a share consensus estimate. The online marketplace’s
revenue also beat Wall Street forecasts, as it saw nearly 19 million new
and reactivated buyers. Costco
(COST) – Costco reported a July comparable sales increase of 13.2%,
more than twice what Wall Street had anticipated. The warehouse retailer
also saw a more than 75% jump in digital sales.
“It’s night and day compared to what existed in 2016,” Krebs said. He said he’s confident that “2020 will be the most protected and most secure election in modern history.” Lawmakers, meanwhile, have fallen into partisanbickering with Republicans and Democrats accusing each other of aiding U.S. enemies rather than combating them. That split screen has been a relative constant during the past four years. And
it comes as officials are facing a new kind of insecurity – a
potentially massive wave of mail-in ballots as fewer people go to
physical polling places during the coronavirus pandemic.
With
some notable exceptions, federal, state and local officials have made
steady progress with changes to transition to more secure paper ballots
and implement cybersecurity protections and post-election audits.
Congress,
meanwhile, has failed to pass any significant campaign or election
security legislation. It has delivered about $1.2 billion to states to
improve cybersecurity and make voting safer during the pandemic, but
that’s far less than Democrats have requested and many experts say is
necessary.
Recently, the congressional wrangling has focused on a Republican investigation into work in Ukraine by Joe Biden’s son Hunter.
For
the past several weeks, Democrats including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
(Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) have warned
about a foreign disinformation campaign trying to get Congress to
undermine the election — a likely reference to the investigation led by
Sens. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa).
Biden
campaign spokesman Andrew Bates has accused Johnson of “facilitating a
foreign influence operation to undermine our democracy” in part to
distract from the Trump administration’s handling of the coronavirus
pandemic, Paul Sonne, Karoun Demirjian and David L. Stern report. Johnson and Grassley punched back yesterday, arguing it was Pelosi and Schumer who were undermining election security by questioning their investigation.
“It
is certainly our goal to eradicate foreign influence from our
elections. But your use of this issue to knowingly and recklessly
promote false narratives for political purposes is completely contrary
to that goal,” the lawmakers wrote. Then they got harsher:
“Although it is undisputed that Russia interfered in the 2016
elections, as they have done in the past and will continue to do in the
future, you have twisted this fact beyond recognition to forge a weapon
for the purpose of attacking your political opponents no matter its
tenuous relationship with facts or the truth.”
So far, Russia doesn't appear to be trying for a repeat of 2016.
That
year, Russian hackers compromised voter databases in at least two
states, though there’s no evidence they changed any information or
compromised actual voting infrastructure. They also scanned but did not
hack into election systems in dozens of other states in addition to
hacking and leaking embarrassing information from the Democratic
National Committee and the Clinton campaign.
Krebs warned of “a
whole lot of scanning” of election-related computer networks by U.S.
adversaries this year, a list that might include China and Iran as well
as Russia. But there has been “nothing at the directed, focused level of 2016,” he said.
That’s
good news for election officials who are trying to remain secure
against Russian hacking even as they tackle a slew of challenges related
to running an election during the pandemic.
But, Russian
disinformation operations aimed at undermining the election and sowing
divisions between Americans are still going strong.
“On disinformation, Russia’s never taken its foot off the gas,” Krebs said.
The federal government is launching new efforts to help election officials in the final months before November.
DHS launched a $2.2. million pilot program
recently with the Center for Internet Security to help election
officials secure the laptops, tablets and other devices they use to
manage election business such as checking in voters at polling places
and reporting vote totals.
The State Department began offering
up to $10 million in rewards for information that helps identify anyone
who is helping a foreign government hack U.S. elections. It’s similar
to a reward program for information that helps locate terrorists.
Election machine companies are also making progress on cybersecurity.
The
nation’s largest voting machine vendor, Elections Systems and Software,
formally introduced a system at the Black Hat conference for ethical
hackers to alert it to bugs in its computer systems. The move is a shift from two years ago
when ES&S downplayed digital threats to its systems and accused
ethical hackers of using unrealistic scenarios to suggest their machines
are far more vulnerable than they are. It also marks at least a partial truce with the cybersecurity research community, which has slammed voting machine vendors for being too opaque about security and not responsive to legitimate criticism. The ES&S program was first reported by Robert McMillan and Alexa Corse at the Wall Street Journal.
ES&S
began accepting reports of digital vulnerabilities by email about 18
months ago, said Chris Wlaschin, the company’s vice president of systems
security. Yesterday the company released a formal document called a
“vulnerability disclosure policy,” which outlines which systems hackers
can access without getting into legal trouble and lays out how and when
ES&S will respond to bug reports.
The program doesn’t extend to voting machines and other systems that generally can’t be accessed on the public Internet.
ES&S
also announced a deal with the cybersecurity company Synack, which will
deploy a team of hackers to probe for bugs in the company’s newest electronic poll book.
The company plans to expand that program to include voting machines and
other tools that aren’t included in the vulnerability disclosure
policy, Wlaschin said.
The keys
Trump now likes mail voting in Florida and Arizona but still says it will be a disaster elsewhere.
The
president’s position on mail voting has grown increasingly convoluted
in recent days as he seems to be strategically reversing his long-held
opposition to the practice — but only in states where it might help his electoral chances.
“So,
in Florida, they've done a good job. In Arizona, they've done a good
job, but they've been doing this thing and refining it for years," Trump
said at a news conference attended by Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R.) Within
hours of Trump praising mail voting in those two states, his campaign
filed a lawsuit to block Nevada from sending ballots to all registered
voters, Amy Gardner and Jacob Bogage report. The election could take “years” to call if Nevada absentee voting is expanded, the president alleged on Fox News and in a tweet. Trump has claimed without evidence that mail voting will lead to massive fraud and disastrous delays. At a separate news conference he said, “I you look at it just out of common sense and pure basic beautiful intelligence, you know it can’t work." Trump
also incorrectly asserted that Nevada does not plan to verify voter
signatures on mail ballots. When a reporter corrected him, he
incorrectly insisted that state officials had earlier said they would
not verify signatures. He also asserted that aging machinery would make
doing so impossible.
Virginia will launch the first U.S. coronavirus alert app that uses Apple and Google software.
The app, called COVIDWISE, will use Bluetooth signals to notify users who were in close proximity with people who report coronavirus infections, Paresh Dave at Reuters reports. “This
is a way we can all work together to contain this virus,” Democratic
Gov. Ralph Northam said in a televised briefing. “No one is tracking
you. None of your personal information is saved.” Virginia
is one of several states that have signed on to use the technology, but
deploying tit has been slowed by a lack of funding and clashes between public officials and the tech giants over data collection.
Some states and countries initially declined to use the software
because it didn't collect GPS location data, which they said could help
them better track the spread of the disease. The companies argued the
technology was too invasive.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is urging U.S. companies to ban downloads of Chinese apps.
The plea comes as a part of the State Department's initiative
to remove allegedly untrustworthy Chinese technology from America's
infrastructure, ranging from mobile apps to telecommunications networks.
Most recently Trump threatened to ban TikTok if its Chinese parent
company doesn't sell its U.S. assets to Microsoft or another U.S.
company by Sept. 15. “We want to see untrusted Chinese apps removed from U.S. app stores,” Pompeo told reporters, Laura Kelly at the Hill reports.
“President Trump has mentioned impending action on TikTok, and for good
reason. With parent companies based in China, apps like TikTok,
WeChat and others are significant threats to personal data of American
citizens, not to mention tools for [Chinese Communist Party] content
censorship.” Both
Google and Apple, which dominate app platforms in the United States,
allow the Chinese social networking site WeChat alongside a host of
other Chinese apps. Privacy researchers at the research organization
Citizen Lab criticized WeChat earlier this year for monitoring content sent from users based abroad to users inside China.
Industry report
YouTube banned a network of nearly 3,000 Chinese accounts for spreading political propaganda.
The content pushed by the accounts related to ongoing protests around police brutality, TechCrunch reports. Researchers at Graphika found similar operations on Facebook and Twitter earlier this year.
More industry news:
Chat room
A
bond hearing conducted on Zoom for the teenager who allegedly
masterminded the recent Twitter hack that embroiled Joe Biden and Barack
Obama was hacked itself. The hackers posted videos to the hearing
including pornography. More from cybersecurity blogger Brian Krebs:
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee will hold a hearing to examine federal and industry efforts to improve cybersecurity in the energy section today at 10 a.m.
The Bank of England has tempered its previous prediction that
the UK economy would rebound swiftly from the recession caused by the
coronavirus crisis, saying on Thursday that GDP would not exceed
pre-pandemic levels until the end of 2021.
The Monetary Policy
Committee left interest rates on hold at 0.1 per cent with its target
for the total stock of its asset purchases also unchanged at £745bn.
It
said the initial hit from lockdown measures had not been quite as
severe as it had projected in May, although it expected output to be
more than 20 per cent lower in the second quarter of 2020 than it had
been in the final quarter of 2019. A strong recovery in some areas of
consumer spending is expected to drive a rapid rebound over the coming
months.
The pound rose 0.4 per cent against the US dollar to
$1.3160 after the decision, its highest level since the turmoil in March
as coronavirus concerns raced through markets.
The MPC was also
more optimistic about the outlook for unemployment than it had been in
May, predicting the jobless rate would peak at about 7.5 per cent at the
end of this year before declining gradually.
Consumer price
inflation was expected to fall further below target, averaging about
0.25 per cent in the latter part of the year, and to be around the MPC’s
2 per cent target in two years.
However, in its guidance the MPC
emphasised that the balance of risks to its forecasts lay very much to
the downside, and said it would not tighten monetary policy “until there
is clear evidence that significant progress is being made in
eliminating spare capacity and achieving the 2 per cent inflation target
sustainably”. The BoE
forecast the recovery would slow dramatically after the third quarter
of 2020, reflecting consumers’ continued concerns over health risks and
fears over job security. By the end of this year, GDP is expected to
remain 5 per cent below its pre-pandemic peak and only to regain its
pre-crisis level at the end of 2021.
Even by the end of 2023, when
the forecast period concludes, GDP would remain 1.5 per cent below its
pre pandemic trajectory, according to the bank. This long-term scarring
is because business investment and start-up activity is expected to
remain weak, weighing on productivity.
The bank’s Financial
Policy Committee said companies continued to face a severe cash-flow
shock, with many likely to need further finance to survive the
disruption. It predicted that if the economy followed the path set out
in the BoE’s central projections, companies could face a cash-flow
deficit of up to £200bn in this financial year.
But the FPC said
that even with corporate insolvencies set to rise, UK banks’ capital
buffers were more than sufficient to absorb losses — unless the loss of
output, and the unemployment rate, were double that in the MPC’s central
projection.
Toyota has become one of the few
carmakers worldwide to eke out a quarterly profit, even as the
coronavirus pandemic prompted a collapse in sales and plant closures.
Shares
in the world’s second-largest carmaker briefly rose nearly 3 per cent
in Tokyo on Thursday following the release of the results, which were
backed by a faster than expected recovery in sales in China and years of
stringent cost-cuts under chief executive Akio Toyoda.
Toyota
maintained its full-year guidance for operating profits and revenue, but
cautioned of “the possibility that the business environment will change
significantly depending on . . . the future spread of Covid-19 and the
state of its containment”. The company recently lost its crown as the world’s most valuable carmaker to US electric vehicle group Tesla.
For
the April to June quarter, Toyota reported a 74 per cent year-on-year
drop in net profit to ¥158.8bn ($1.5bn). While its operating profits
were nearly wiped out, the Japanese group outperformed rivals including
Volkswagen, General Motors and Nissan, which all suffered losses during the period.
Toyota
delivered profits even as group vehicle sales dropped 32 per cent from a
year earlier to 1.8m units due to the pandemic. Losses in the US and
Europe were offset by profits in the company’s financial services arm.
The
results also showed an unexpected boost from Covid-19 in terms of
costs, which fell due to shorter working hours and reduced business
travel.
Meanwhile, it upgraded its annual vehicle sales forecast
to 7.2m vehicles from the 7m projected in May as the pace of recovery in
most regions, led by China, has been faster than expected. During the
first quarter, sales in China rose 14 per cent to 482,000 vehicles.
In
disclosing its net profit guidance for the first time, the company said
it expected a 64 per cent year-on-year drop to ¥730bn for the fiscal
year through March 2021.
“The result is reassuring and there is a
strong indication of an upward revision [in operating profit] during
the fiscal first half,” said Koji Endo, head of equity research at SBI
Securities.
Toyota’s performance stands out compared with domestic rivals
such as Nissan, which has an alliance with France’s Renault. The company
anticipates its biggest ever operating loss this year.
On
Wednesday, Honda reported its largest quarterly loss since 2009 and
warned of a 64 per cent drop in annual profits as car sales fell in
almost all of its main markets.
Honda has historically managed to
offset downturns in car sales with its more profitable motorcycle
business. But the pandemic also sparked a 62 per cent fall in
first-quarter motorcycle sales led by declines in India and Indonesia.
Seiji
Kuraishi, Honda’s executive vice-president, said the company aimed to
return to profitability for the full year, pointing to a strong recovery
of car sales in China and demand for motorcycles in Vietnam and
Thailand.
Image copyright
Reuters
US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has outlined the steps he wants US companies to take to deal with "untrusted Chinese apps".
The measures go far beyond President Donald Trump's current push to force the sale of TikTok to an American firm.
Mr Pompeo says apps like TikTok and WeChat pose "significant threats to the personal data of American citizens".
Wednesday's announcement marks a further deterioration in relations between Washington and Beijing.
The
US government argues that such apps harvest the data of US citizens and
could be exploited by the Chinese Communist Party, which Beijing has
denied.
One of the significant steps involves the removal of
"untrusted" Chinese apps from US app stores, along with clamping down on
cloud computing providers.
Media playback is unsupported on your device
Media captionWATCH: Instagram rolls out its TikTok rival ReelsAlong with the Chinese telecoms giant Huawei, TikTok has
been firmly in the sights of US President Donald Trump as two companies
he wants to crack down on.
The scope of those measures has now
been extended much wider and includes Chinese technology giants such as
Alibaba, Baidu and Tencent, which have a presence in the US.
'Clean network'
Mr Pompeo, who is America's most senior diplomat, set out a five-pronged approach to "safeguard America’s assets" that include:
·
Ensuring the "untrusted People’s Republic of China (PRC) carriers"
are not connected with the US telecommunications networks
· Removing "untrusted" applications from US app stores
·
Stopping "untrusted" Chinese smartphone manufacturers from
pre-installing, or making available for download, the most popular US
apps
· Preventing US citizens’ sensitive personal
information and companies’ intellectual property from being stored and
accessed on Chinese cloud-based services
· Ensuring undersea cables connecting the US to the global internet are not compromised for intelligence gathering by China
It
is unclear how the US would enforce the new guidelines or what
authority it has to do so. But Mr Pompeo said more than 30 countries now
had "clean networks" which are designed to secure a country's critical
telecommunications.
Mr Trump has pledged to ban TikTok in America
by 15 September unless its US business is sold to an American company.
Microsoft is currently in talks to buy it.
TikTok, which is owned by Chinese tech firm ByteDance, has said its US users’ data is stored outside China and is safe.
US
officials have long complained that Chinese intellectual property theft
has cost the economy billions of dollars in revenue and thousands of
jobs, which Beijing has consistently denied.
Last month, Mr Pompeo
said the US was looking at banning TikTok as well as other Chinese
social media apps on national security concerns, calling them “Trojan
horses for Chinese intelligence.”
Posts
Image copyright
Reuters
