Yes, because draconian rules around Covid wasn’t an exercise in dictatorship, but a successful attempt to deliberately contain the virus before a vaccine could be developed. This approach successfully quarantined some cities, while life in other cities was normal. Busy airports in most of China is evidence of this normality. So instead of lax rules on everyone, and everyone basically self-quarantining themselves, China approach was to heavily and quickly quarantine specific places, with no quarantines on most other places.
As the virus developed, Covid became more easily transmittable but also weaker due to increased general immunity and vaccine development. By 2022, variants of Covid could not be contained using China’s approach and China eventually stopped quarantines altogether. However, China’s approach prompted debate about its effectiveness in stopping deaths, with many observers comparing the high number of deaths outside China and their incredulity for why Chinese deaths were much lower. Even some going as far as claiming China was hiding all these deaths.
In fact, China with draconian quarantines, managed to keep the virus at bay, as evidenced by the high numbers of internal flight passengers, was economically resilient because quarantine for some meant normal lives for others, and suffered fewer number of deaths.
frostyflakes1 on
Contrary to what the media may have led you to believe, the lockdowns in China were not constant. They were rolled out in response to outbreaks, and rolled back once the outbreaks were contained.
The lockdowns in China were extremely effective at containing the virus, such that ’normal life‘ could continue in China when the outbreaks were contained. Other countries, in comparison, did very little to contain the virus, which allowed Covid to spread practically unmitigated.
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
3 Kommentare
Trade/freight.
Yes, because draconian rules around Covid wasn’t an exercise in dictatorship, but a successful attempt to deliberately contain the virus before a vaccine could be developed. This approach successfully quarantined some cities, while life in other cities was normal. Busy airports in most of China is evidence of this normality. So instead of lax rules on everyone, and everyone basically self-quarantining themselves, China approach was to heavily and quickly quarantine specific places, with no quarantines on most other places.
As the virus developed, Covid became more easily transmittable but also weaker due to increased general immunity and vaccine development. By 2022, variants of Covid could not be contained using China’s approach and China eventually stopped quarantines altogether. However, China’s approach prompted debate about its effectiveness in stopping deaths, with many observers comparing the high number of deaths outside China and their incredulity for why Chinese deaths were much lower. Even some going as far as claiming China was hiding all these deaths.
In fact, China with draconian quarantines, managed to keep the virus at bay, as evidenced by the high numbers of internal flight passengers, was economically resilient because quarantine for some meant normal lives for others, and suffered fewer number of deaths.
Contrary to what the media may have led you to believe, the lockdowns in China were not constant. They were rolled out in response to outbreaks, and rolled back once the outbreaks were contained.
The lockdowns in China were extremely effective at containing the virus, such that ’normal life‘ could continue in China when the outbreaks were contained. Other countries, in comparison, did very little to contain the virus, which allowed Covid to spread practically unmitigated.