The house price in Hong Kong is well-known to be "unaffordable." This paper argues that the commonly used house price-to-income ratio may be misleading in an economy with almost half of the population living in either public rental housing or subsidized ownership. Moreover, we re-focus on the relationships between economic fundamentals and the housing market of Hong Kong. While the aggregate GDP, population, longevity continues to grow, the real wage and household income fall behind. The trend component of the real GDP growth suffers a permanent downward shift after the first quarter of 1989 (a "political scar"). The trend component of real wage growth is close to zero, and the counterpart of real consumption and real investment decline steadily. Meanwhile, the trend component of the real housing rent and price display patterns that decouple from the macroeconomic variables. We also discuss the directions for future research.
BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, over 99% of adults in Hong Kong use face masks in public. With the limited supply of face masks in the market and the uncertainty about the future development of COVID-19, reusing face masks is a legitimate way to reduce usage. Although this practice is not recommended, reusing face masks is common in Hong Kong. This study aimed to examine the practice of reusing face masks among adults in Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic and its association with their health beliefs toward this health crisis. METHODS: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted. A quota sample of 1000 adults was recruited in Hong Kong in April 2020. Guided by the Health Belief Model, the subjects were invited to answer questions on their practice of reusing face masks and health beliefs toward COVID-19 through telephone interview. Their practice on reuse, storage, and decontamination of used face masks were summarized by descriptive statistics. The difference in health beliefs between the subjects who reused and did not reuse face masks was examined by conducting an independent t test. The association between health beliefs and reuse of face masks was determined by conducting a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: One-third (n = 345, 35.4%) of the subjects reused face masks in an average of 2.5 days. Among them, 207 subjects stored and 115 subjects decontaminated their used face masks by using various methods. The subjects who reused face masks significantly perceived having inadequate face masks (t = 3.905; p < 0.001). Having a higher level of perception of having inadequate face masks increased the likelihood of reusing face masks (OR = 0.784; CI 95%: 0.659–0.934; p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Despite having 90 face masks in stock, the adults who reused face masks significantly perceived that they had inadequate face masks. Concerted effort of health care professionals, community organizations, and the government will improve individuals' practice in use of face masks and alleviate their ...
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.