Doctors denounce continued COVID restrictions at Japan's hospitals
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Much of the world may have moved on from the coronavirus pandemic, but a painful legacy lingers in Japan: hospitals continuing to restrict patient visitations, even in the case of people wishing to see terminally ill loved ones.
In early 2025, Japan marked five years since its first COVID-19 case, after which the disease claimed more than 130,000 lives up until August 2024.
Infections have reappeared in seasonal waves even after the government downgraded the threat in May 2023 and placed COVID-19 in the same risk category as seasonal influenza.
For families who want to see hospitalized loved ones, Japan appears to be stuck in time. Hospital websites continue to post "COVID-19" bulletins about visitations such as requiring masks and temperature checks, setting time limits and restricting the number of visitors.
Now a group of physicians and social workers is demanding the restrictions be abolished or curbed, calling them a violation of human rights.
"It's unthinkable to me that they're still this strict," said a doctor in his 30s from the Tokyo metropolitan area on condition of anonymity, expressing a mixture of surprise and disgust at the continued COVID policies.
In January, his wife's mother was hospitalized with cancer at a facility in Akita Prefecture, northeastern Japan.
The hospital had said that visitation was only available for "two family members," and his wife was not permitted to see her own mother -- at least at first on hospital grounds.
Hopeful they would be allowed to see her after she was moved to a restriction-eased palliative care ward in March, they went to Akita with their child to visit the wife's mother.
But when the Tokyo doctor tried explaining to the hospital staff that "this might be the last time" for the woman to see her grandchild, they refused, arguing that children are not permitted due to their high risk of transmitting infection, saying rules are rules.
However, after the family persisted, the hospital said the woman "can meet with anyone if she leaves the hospital temporarily."
A "nursing taxi," a car service catering specifically for persons with special needs, was hastily arranged to bring her home where she was able to see her daughter, grandchild, family and friends.
The doctor was not at all satisfied with the effort.
"If this was supposed to be an infection control measure, the hospital's response contradicts itself," he said, adding even pets are allowed on hospital visitations. "How is it that patients are allowed to see their dogs and cats but not their grandchildren?"
The doctor is an infectious disease specialist and was involved in the pandemic response at a Tokyo hospital. Looking at the situation overseas, he said, "Japan's restrictions on visitation are excessive. I think there is an aspect of the medical field here that thinks it is easier not to have hospital visitations."
The health ministry has recommended that "consideration be given to ensuring opportunities for visits as much as possible, keeping in mind both the importance of visitations and infection-control measures," but has left specific policy measures to individual hospitals and medical facilities.
Last fall, a group of doctors who comprise an association for post-COVID 19 medical and welfare issues examined the situation at university and Red Cross hospitals across the country. It found that most had some restrictions still in place. There were some that do not allow visitations at all.
Kazuya Iwai, co-chair of the association and chief doctor of infection control at Shizuoka City Shizuoka Hospital in central Japan, says there are no restrictions at his hospital and children are also permitted to visit patients.
Although the hospital does not require masks, there is no difference in infection rates compared with other hospitals, he adds.
"There is no scientific evidence that visitation restrictions are effective in preventing the spread of infections," Iwai said.
"It is an important right for hospitalized patients to visit their loved ones, but patients and their families are reluctant to say so because they feel an obligation since they are being cared for," he points out.
Although there are moves to gradually ease restrictions, he warned, "If the easing is at the discretion of the hospitals, there is a risk that they will return to strict policies depending on their situations of infection and other factors. The public needs to raise its voice and speak out."
"Not being able to see family members in their final days is a human rights violation. The disadvantages are far greater than the advantages," he said.
(By Toru Ichikawa)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Tokyo Weekender
a day ago
- Tokyo Weekender
Japanese Scientists Develop Artificial Blood Compatible With All Blood Types
A critical component of healthcare, blood transfusions play a vital role in saving lives around the globe every day. Maintaining an adequate blood supply, though, is no easy task, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The demand for O – negative blood — the universal donor type — often exceeds supply and donations have a limited shelf life. Looking to address the issue are a group of Japanese scientists led by Hiromi Sakai at Nara Medical University . They've developed a new type of artificial blood that can be used in patients of any blood type. The artificial blood is created by extracting hemoglobin — a protein containing iron that facilitates the transportation of oxygen in red blood cells — from expired donor blood. It is then encased in a protective shell to create stable, virus-free artificial red blood cells. As these artificial cells have no blood type, there is no need for compatibility testing. The synthetic blood can reportedly be stored for up to two years at room temperature and five years under refrigeration. That is a significant improvement over donated red blood cells, which can only be stored under refrigeration for a maximum of 42 days . Artificial Blood Trials Small-scale studies began in 2022. Three groups of four healthy male volunteers aged 20 to 50 received a single intravenous injection of hemoglobin vesicles — artificial oxygen carriers that mimic the structure of red blood cells — in increasing amounts, up to 100 milliliters. While some participants experienced mild side effects, there were no significant changes in vital signs, including blood pressure. Building on that success, Sakai announced that his team was accelerating the process last July. In March, it started administering between 100 and 400 milliliters of the artificial blood cell solution to volunteers. If no side effects are confirmed, the trial will shift to examin ing the treatment's efficacy and safety. It aims to put the artificial red blood cells into practical use by around 2030. While these studies are taking place, Professor Teruyuki Komatsu of Chuo University's Faculty of Science and Engineering is also working on the development of artificial oxygen carriers, using albumin-encased hemoglobin to stabilize blood pressure and treat conditions like hemorrhage and stroke. So far, animal studies have shown promising results. As a result, researchers are now eager to move to human trials. Related Posts Japanese Researchers Develop Peptide To Counter COVID-19 Viruses 'Flesh Eating' STSS Infections Reach Record Numbers in Japan Eating Disorders on the Rise in Japan
The Mainichi
a day ago
- The Mainichi
Editorial: With WHO Pandemic Agreement, global cooperation needed to raise its efficacy
Member countries of the World Health Organization (WHO) adopted an agreement at a general meeting that sets forth a response the international community should take in the event of a future pandemic. Multilateral cooperation must be strengthened and measures to protect lives must be advanced. During the coronavirus pandemic, which claimed more than seven million lives, WHO was delayed in its initial response, leaving developing countries unable to secure sufficient vaccine supplies due in part to hoarding by developed nations. The Pandemic Agreement aims to address these shortcomings and create a global environment in which everyone can benefit equally from medical care. Under the initiative, advanced nations support developing countries in securing medicinal products and procuring funds. In exchange for collecting information on pathogens necessary for drug development and providing it to pharmaceutical companies WHO will receive at least 10% of vaccines produced as a donation. These vaccines will then be distributed to developing countries. The detailed design of the system will be finalized over the next year. WHO member states will also work to develop domestic laws to request pharmaceutical firms to supply vaccines. The agreement will take effect upon ratification by 60 countries. The question is how effective the agreement will prove. The United States, a pharmaceutical powerhouse, was absent from the General Assembly after President Donald Trump's administration announced the country's withdrawal from the WHO. Unless major U.S. drugmakers, which led the world in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, participate in the donation program, meaningful results cannot be expected. A system to encourage companies to join the initiative must be established. Washington has also stopped contributing operating funds to WHO, compelling the latter to significantly slash its budgets and undergo restructuring. This is likely to hinder efforts to secure personnel for assisting developing countries. The negotiations, which began in 2022, came to a brink of collapse after the rift between developed and developing nations deepened. Yet, the world has no alternative to WHO as a control tower when a pandemic arrives. It deserves credit that member countries came together and drew up the new rules after extending negotiations by a year amid the U.S. absence. False information over the agreement, such as that WHO will forcibly vaccinate people, became viral worldwide via social media. There is no such clause, and the agreement stipulates that the sovereignty of member states will be respected. Both the WHO and its members should exhaust all efforts to send out correct information. A new pandemic could occur at any time. Countries must take the adoption of the agreement as an opportunity to reaffirm the importance of international cooperation.
The Mainichi
2 days ago
- The Mainichi
Doctors denounce continued COVID restrictions at Japan's hospitals
TOKYO (Kyodo) -- Much of the world may have moved on from the coronavirus pandemic, but a painful legacy lingers in Japan: hospitals continuing to restrict patient visitations, even in the case of people wishing to see terminally ill loved ones. In early 2025, Japan marked five years since its first COVID-19 case, after which the disease claimed more than 130,000 lives up until August 2024. Infections have reappeared in seasonal waves even after the government downgraded the threat in May 2023 and placed COVID-19 in the same risk category as seasonal influenza. For families who want to see hospitalized loved ones, Japan appears to be stuck in time. Hospital websites continue to post "COVID-19" bulletins about visitations such as requiring masks and temperature checks, setting time limits and restricting the number of visitors. Now a group of physicians and social workers is demanding the restrictions be abolished or curbed, calling them a violation of human rights. "It's unthinkable to me that they're still this strict," said a doctor in his 30s from the Tokyo metropolitan area on condition of anonymity, expressing a mixture of surprise and disgust at the continued COVID policies. In January, his wife's mother was hospitalized with cancer at a facility in Akita Prefecture, northeastern Japan. The hospital had said that visitation was only available for "two family members," and his wife was not permitted to see her own mother -- at least at first on hospital grounds. Hopeful they would be allowed to see her after she was moved to a restriction-eased palliative care ward in March, they went to Akita with their child to visit the wife's mother. But when the Tokyo doctor tried explaining to the hospital staff that "this might be the last time" for the woman to see her grandchild, they refused, arguing that children are not permitted due to their high risk of transmitting infection, saying rules are rules. However, after the family persisted, the hospital said the woman "can meet with anyone if she leaves the hospital temporarily." A "nursing taxi," a car service catering specifically for persons with special needs, was hastily arranged to bring her home where she was able to see her daughter, grandchild, family and friends. The doctor was not at all satisfied with the effort. "If this was supposed to be an infection control measure, the hospital's response contradicts itself," he said, adding even pets are allowed on hospital visitations. "How is it that patients are allowed to see their dogs and cats but not their grandchildren?" The doctor is an infectious disease specialist and was involved in the pandemic response at a Tokyo hospital. Looking at the situation overseas, he said, "Japan's restrictions on visitation are excessive. I think there is an aspect of the medical field here that thinks it is easier not to have hospital visitations." The health ministry has recommended that "consideration be given to ensuring opportunities for visits as much as possible, keeping in mind both the importance of visitations and infection-control measures," but has left specific policy measures to individual hospitals and medical facilities. Last fall, a group of doctors who comprise an association for post-COVID 19 medical and welfare issues examined the situation at university and Red Cross hospitals across the country. It found that most had some restrictions still in place. There were some that do not allow visitations at all. Kazuya Iwai, co-chair of the association and chief doctor of infection control at Shizuoka City Shizuoka Hospital in central Japan, says there are no restrictions at his hospital and children are also permitted to visit patients. Although the hospital does not require masks, there is no difference in infection rates compared with other hospitals, he adds. "There is no scientific evidence that visitation restrictions are effective in preventing the spread of infections," Iwai said. "It is an important right for hospitalized patients to visit their loved ones, but patients and their families are reluctant to say so because they feel an obligation since they are being cared for," he points out. Although there are moves to gradually ease restrictions, he warned, "If the easing is at the discretion of the hospitals, there is a risk that they will return to strict policies depending on their situations of infection and other factors. The public needs to raise its voice and speak out." "Not being able to see family members in their final days is a human rights violation. The disadvantages are far greater than the advantages," he said. (By Toru Ichikawa)
