A year on, when looking back at the decision to seal off Wuhan, many people in Wuhan and across China feel “grateful” for the government’s decisive measures, which effectively and quickly stunted viral spreading. They believe it was incontrovertibly the best way to throttle the virus’ fast transmission and that it saved many lives.
A day before the city decided to seal itself off on January 23, the number of COVID-19 cases was around 500. At that time, it was unclear how serious the epidemic was and how contagious the virus was, Wu Zunyou, chief epidemiologist at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, told the Global Times, noting that such a wise decision reflects the foresight of the central government.
Wu pointed out that if Wuhan had not been locked down, there would have been several severe outbreaks in other places in China similar to that in Wuhan.
Wu said he was on a joint China-WHO mission on February 16 through 24, and conducted analyses with experts in the mission. He concluded that if Wuhan had not been closed, the number of infected people in China would have reached nearly 1.5 to 2 million by the end of February. It means that the decision prevented 1.5 to 2 million people from being infected and avoided some 60,000 deaths.
“At that time, the head of the WHO expert group accepted my assessment. Though he did not use specific figures in the joint mission report, he included a similar statement in the report,” Wu said.
The instruction to impose traffic control and limit people’s movement in Wuhan and Hubei was made by President Xi Jinping on January 22, according to the White Paper on fighting COVID-19: China in Action, issued by the State Council Information Office.
On January 22, Xi ordered the immediate imposition of tight restrictions on the movement of people and channels of exit in Hubei and Wuhan, the white paper said.
The decision was made two days after evidence was announced, revealing that the virus transmits via humans.
The lockdown mode, despite previously being criticized by some Western countries as “draconian,” has now become an enduring tool everywhere to quell the virus.
Yet while Wuhan and many parts of China have shaken off the epidemic and returned to normal life, countries in Europe and the US are still struggling to deal with the virus and even “lockdowns” have not been entirely successful.
Italy, which also went through several rounds of lockdown, has registered 81,325 COVID-19 deaths since last February, AFP reported on Monday, noting that the Italian government issued a new decree extending curbs to keep a lid on infections. Italy’s cases soared from October to January, from more than 400,000 to around 2.41 million.
Enrico from Lodi, Lombardy told the Global Times that negligence toward lockdown measures has fueled the increase of cases.
“This round of the lockdown was much lighter than we experienced in last spring, as people are now tired and trying to get back to normal. People assemble at friends’ houses to have dinner, party outside to celebrate festivals. And the schools were not completely closed,” said Enrico.
Another reason why the Western-style lockdowns achieved little success is that they relaxed the bans too soon, according to Yang Zhanqiu, deputy director of the pathogen biology department at Wuhan University. “They re-opened schools and restaurants when there are still hundreds or even thousands of cases. It’s like a forest fire: If it is not put out completely, the remaining sparks will eventually cause a new round of disaster.”
Meanwhile, China is improving its model for better “precise control management.”
After the recent flare-ups in North China, local governments adopted measures to curb the spread of the virus. Yet the lockdown measures in Hebei cities – Shijiazhuang, Xingtai and Langfang – were not as harsh as in Wuhan. Residents in Hebei could go downstairs to pick up their deliveries or purchase food from stores inside their residential communities. The cities later suspended public transportation, such as the subway and buses; taxi services were also stopped, besides the shut-down of traffic to and from the cities.
During previous outbreaks in cities such as Dalian, Qingdao and Chengdu, the lockdown measures were imposed on specific community compounds or a district, instead of the whole city.
Wuhan’s lockdown reached a city-wide scale because there were outbreaks all over the city, with causes that were unclear, and there was a lack of effective testing methods, said Yang.
The virologist noted that post-Wuhan outbreaks have been on a far smaller scale, with clear sources, making them easier to control. “As long as we quarantine all that should be quarantined, such as close contacts, confirmed cases and silent carriers, there’s nothing to worry about.”
Wang Guangfa, a respiratory expert at Peking University First Hospital, told the Global Times that pinpointing contagious sources and cutting off the root of infection are principal devices in stemming a viral spread. “So now, with no effective cure in sight and a mass vaccination underway, lockdown measures still remain the quickest and most useful way to put off the infection.”
He also gave credit to China’s swift response to later outbreaks in other cities. “Wuhan’s citywide lockdown was no longer seen, because other cities also took the lesson, [which is to] stay vigilant against the virus, and took swift responses whenever a case emerges. For contagious diseases, you have to nip the infection in its bud.”
In cities where mini-outbreaks were reported, such as Dalian and Qingdao, swift responses were routinely referred to even with relatively low numbers of infections, such as a rapid roll-out of massive nucleic acid testing across the whole city with short notice, and ensured compliance with government measures, such as totally sealing off residential compounds.
In the eastern Chinese city of Qingdao, where just a few cases were reported in October, the city completed citywide tests within five days, taking samples of over 10 million residents.
“Given the huge number and high density of Chinese population, we have proven that [these measures] are very effective,” Mi Feng, spokesperson at the country’s National Health Commission, said in a news conference.
Wang also noted such “precious virus prevention” methods also helped China steer clear of shutting down economically significant cities like Beijing, despite substantial flare-ups.
“Lockdown is not the usual way to contain an epidemic. But now, with no further medical progress made in treating the virus, early and strict quarantine measures means saving cities from repeating Wuhan’s plight last year,” said Wang.
Firefighters conduct disinfection at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in Wuhan, central China’s Hubei Province, April 3, 2020.Photo:Xinhua
