[2021-09-05]与其他任何国家相比，中国已经成功地控制了德尔塔变种。现在是美国和其他国家效仿中国模式，实行严格封锁的时候了吗？

Robin Daverman World traveler
China has been successful in controlling the Delta variant compared to any other nation. Is it time America & others follow the Chinese model with stringent lockdowns?
No, because the pandemic has always been viewed as primarily an economic problem in the US, and not a medical problem.
Say I have 100 customers, $100 in revenue, $80 in expenses (labor, rent, supplies), which gives me $20 in profit. Say the mortality rate of Covid is 1%. Assuming all my customers get Covid. 1 dies. 99 survive. So now I have $99 in revenue. Assuming my expenses are the same, I end up with $19 in profit instead of $20. Not great, but I will live.
But if you have a complete lock down, then there’s no customer showing up, and I lose $100 in revenue. But I still have $80 in expenses, so immediately, I not only don’t have the $20 in profit, I’m $80 in the hole, which is going to take me 4 more period just to climb out of. But what if I don’t have this $80 raining-day fund? Then I’m dead. Bankrupted!

【回答】世界旅行者
“与其他任何国家相比，中国在控制德尔塔变种方面取得了成功。现在是美国和其他国家效仿中国模式，实行严格封锁的时候了吗？”
不，因为在美国，这场疫情一直被视为主要是经济问题，而不是医疗问题。
假设我有100个客户，收入100美元，开支80美元(人工、租金、供应)，这样我就有20美元的利润。假设新冠的死亡率为1%。假设我所有的顾客都感染了新冠。1人死亡。99人活下来。所以现在我有99美元的收入。假设我的开支是相同的，我最终获得了19美元的利润而不是20美元。不是很好，但我还能活下去。
但是，如果你完全封锁了，那么就没有客户了，我就会损失100美元的收入。但是我还有80美元的支出，所以当即，我不仅没有20美元的利润了，我还有80美元的亏空，这将需要我再花4个周期的时间才能爬出来。但是如果我没有这80美元的应急基金怎么办？那我就死定了。破产了！

This is why no business in the US will ever support a lock down, ever. The math doesn’t work. Businesses can survive Covid but not lockdowns. It doesn’t matter how successful China does with Delta. The US businesses will not support lockdown unless someone offers them REVENUE PROTECTION. Who in the world will do that?!
This is why the US has this on-again off-again partial lockdowns, If too many people (i.e., customers) are dying, then the customers will voluntarily hole up in their homes, which will get the reported new case numbers down a bit, then the customers will get used to it and come out consuming again. That’s the most important thing.
In China, the story is entirely a public health problem. Say the old Covid Alpha can infect 10 people in 3 days. Say the new Covid Delta is much stronger, and it can infect 10 people in just 1 day, which means it can infect 1,000 people in 3 days. OK then either one has to be 3 times faster in isolating infected people, or expanding the quarantined population from 10 people to 1,000 people. Or both. That’s it. Simple.

这就是为什么美国没有一家企业会支持封锁，永远不会。这道算术题行不通。企业可以在疫情中生存，但不能在封锁中生存。中国在控制德尔塔有多成功并不重要。除非有人向美国企业提供收入保障，否则他们不会支持封锁的。世界上有谁会这么做？！
这就是为什么美国有这种断断续续的部分封锁，如果有太多的人(即客户)死亡，那么客户就会自愿躲在家里，这将使报告的新病例数量下降一点，然后客户习惯了之后，再次出来消费。这才是最重要的问题。
在中国，这完全是一个公共卫生问题。据说旧的新冠病毒阿尔法可以在3天内感染10人。假设新的新冠病毒变种德尔塔更强大，它可以在短短1天内感染10人，也就是说它可以在3天内感染1000人。好的，那要么以3倍的速度隔离感染者，要么将隔离人群从10人扩大到1000人。或两者兼而有之。就是这样。简单明了。

This is why if someone has symptoms at 5pm on a Friday afternoon, and the hospital comes back with a positive test at 7pm Friday night, you will see a cordon sanitaire set up by 10 pm, with people lined up to take PCR tests, and they’ll be running tests till 2am in the morning, and start collecting samples again at 6am the next morning (Saturday morning). You never see any weekday/weekend difference in the Chinese Covid data, because does the virus take weekend off? No? Then epidemiologists don’t take weekend off either.
Calling the Chinese approach “stringent lockdowns” does not do it justice. It’s actually the standard Test -> Trace -> Isolate approach. People who work in a Covid+ environment get tested once every other day. People who work at airports and ports get tested twice a week. People with significant public-facing jobs (hotels, schools) get tested every week. 3 people tested positive, 50,000 people went into isolation, receiving medical attention, and stay in isolation until they test negative again. All pretty standard public health measures. Take the sources of infection out of the general population, immediately, no more new cases in the general population! 4 - 6 weeks, it’s eradicated. Anybody can do it, if they really want to. Also it turned out that if people receive treatment early, the mortality rate is very low. For example, nobody died in this Delta outbreak in China. Not a single one.
Thus the question is not whether Delta can be eradicated. The question is whether the country is run by businessmen or by epidemiologists.

这就是为什么如果有人在周五下午5点出现症状，并且医院在周五晚上7点得出阳性检测结果，你就会看到在晚上10点设置的防疫警戒线，人们排队进行核酸检测，他们会一直进行检测到凌晨2点，并在第二天早上6点(周六早上)再次开始采集样本。你在中国的疫情数据中是看不到工作日/周末有任何的差异，因为病毒会在周末休息？不是这样吗？所以流行病学家周末也不会休息。
将中国的做法称为“严格的封锁”并不公平。这实际上是标准的“检测->追踪->隔离”方法。在变种新冠疫情的环境中工作的人，每隔一天接受一次检测。在机场和港口工作的人每周接受两次检测。那些从事面向公众的重要职位(酒店、学校)的人，每周都要接受检测。3人检测呈阳性，5万人就进入隔离状态，接受医疗护理，并一直隔离，直到再次检测呈阴性。这些都是非常标准的公共卫生措施。立即从普通人群中消除感染源，让普通人群中不再有新的病例！4到6周，感染就会被根除。任何人都可以做到，只要他们真的想做。而且，如果人们早期接受治疗，死亡率是很低的。例如，在中国的这次德尔塔疫情中，没有人死亡。一个都没有。
所以，问题不在于德尔塔能否被根除。问题在于，这个国家是由商人还是流行病学家来运作。
-------------------------------------------------------

James Chrisholm
Can lifelong subscr1iption to vaccines be very profitable for businesses as well?

【回复】对企业来说，终身接种疫苗也能带来很好的收益吗？

Robin Daverman
Of course! Goldman Sachs once published a research article saying curing a disease is not a profitable model. You should turn an acute disease into a chronic one, and then treat the symptoms of the disease but don’t attempt to cure it. Perpetual predictable cash flow. Try to use your brain, said Goldman Sachs. Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: 'Is curing patients a sustainable business model?'

【罗宾回复】当然！高盛曾经发表过一篇研究文章，称治愈疾病不是一种盈利的模式。你应该把急性病变成慢性病，然后治疗疾病的症状，但不要试图治愈它。永续可预测的现金流。试着动动你的大脑，高盛如是说。引用文章《高盛在生物技术研究报告中问道：“治疗病人是一种可持续的商业模式吗？”》

Chris Crox
That's one of the most horrific articles I have ever read.

【回复】这是我读过的最恐怖的文章之一。

James Chrisholm
We live in a very sick world. I hope to go off-grid some day..

【回复】我们生活在一个非常病态的世界里，我希望有一天能远离尘嚣...

Sarah Lee
Wish I had the link, but a university did a study showing that doing what China does actually helps the economy get back on its feet better than a soft and half hearted approach. Meaning, what the US is doing is actually counterintuitive to the minimal economic impact it is looking to achieve. It makes sense as with a soft lockdown, you end up losing productivity to people who are sick, and on the other hand, (some) people are afraid to go back outside to purchase and consume as they are afraid to contract the disease. It's generalization with lost nuances, but I think you get my drift. With that logic though, it's not strange therefore to see that China was the only country with positive growth last year.

【回复】我希望我有这个链接，但是有一所大学做了一项研究，表明做中国所做的事情，实际上有助于经济复苏，而不是采取一种软弱无力的方式。这意味着，美国正在做的事情，实际上与它希望实现的最小经济影响相悖。这是有道理的，因为如果是软封锁，你最终会因为生病的人而失去生产力，另一方面，(一些)人害怕回到外面购买和消费，因为他们害怕感染疾病。这只是一般的概括，但我想你明白我的意思。不过，按照这种逻辑，中国是去年唯一一个实现正增长的国家，这并不奇怪了。

Robin Daverman
Yes, I agree, and this is also easily model’ed out. Say in Scenario A, you have 100 districts in your city. By setting up Covid surveillance, at any given time, there is either no case at all, or only 1 district has Covid cases. Alternatively if in Scenario B, you don’t have such a Covid surveillance system in place, then there is constant Covid all the time. So of course the economy will be worse in Scenario B.
I think in China’s case, 99.9% of the towns and villages never had a single case of Covid, ever. Right now, all these foreign companies, if they have supply chain in China, they are gold. If they don’t, they are f*cked!

【罗宾回复】是的，我同意，这也是很容易模拟出来的。假设在场景A中，你的城市有100个地区。通过建立新冠监测系统，在任何给定的时间，要么根本没有病例，要么只有一个地区有新冠病例。或者，如果在场景B中，你没有这样的新冠监测系统，那么一直都会有持续的新冠病例。所以，在场景B中，经济当然会更糟糕。
我认为在中国，99.9%的城镇和乡村从未出现过一例新冠病例。现在，所有这些外国公司，如果他们在中国有供应链，他们就是黄金。如果他们没有，那他们就完犊子了！

Kokwai Thong
‘I lose $100 in revenue. But I still have $80 in expenses, so immediately, I not only don’t have the $20 in profit, I’m $80 in the hole, which is going to take me 4 more period just to climb out of. But what if I don’t have this $80 raining-day fund? Then I’m dead. Bankrupted!’
Basically, one of the reasons why the US bailed out of Afghanistan quicker than expected was because it was spending itself into a hole. What are current cash levels at the Treasury? Well, after rising as high as $1.8 trillion last July, the cash held at the Treasury General Account has plunged to just $309 billion, the lowest level since the covid pandemic. This is largely due to the borrowing cap which has prompted the government to cut bill issuance and draw down its cash pile, while also putting tremendous downward pressure on short-term rates, pushing repo rates into negative territory, and breaching the Fed's reverse repo 0.05% "floor" level as both Bills and overnight GC repo now trade below this level.
Treasury has injected a massive $1.5 trillion in liquidity into the market while soaking up massive amount of collateral. So the debt ceiling needs to be resolved quickly, and the Fed has to do some hidden quantitative tightening, tapering while the Treasury has to drain liquidity by issuing new T bills to refill its cash balance, and it has to find some buyers.

【回复】“我损失100美元的收入。但是我还有80美元的支出，所以立刻，我不仅没有20美元的利润了，我还有80美元的亏空，这将需要我再花4个周期的时间才能爬出来。但是如果我没有这80美元的应急基金怎么办？那我就死定了。破产了！”
基本上，美国之所以比预期更快地从阿富汗撤军，其中一个原因就是它正把自己亏空。财政部目前的现金水平是多少？在去年7月升至高达1.8万亿美元之后，财政部总账户中的现金已经跌至3090亿美元，这是自从新冠疫情爆发以来的最低水平。这在很大程度上是因为借款上限促使政府削减票据发行量和提取现金储备，同时也给短期利率带来巨大的下行压力，推动回购利率进入负值区间，并突破美联储逆向回购利率0.05%的“底线”水平，由于票据和隔夜回购利率目前都低于这一水平。
美国财政部向市场注入了1.5万亿美元的巨额流动资金，同时吸收了大量抵押品。因此，债务上限问题需要尽快解决，美联储不得不采取一些隐性的量化紧缩措施，逐渐缩减规模，而财政部不得不通过发行新的短期国库券来吸收流动资金，以重新填充现金余额，而且还必须找到一些买家。

Boon Kuan Chung
Even if the US is run by epidemiologists, there is no way to do what China does because the people don't even want to wear mask just to show “They refuse to live in fear".

【回复】即使美国是由流行病学家运作的，也没有办法像中国那样做，因为人们甚至不想戴上口罩，只是为了表示“他们拒绝生活在恐惧中”。

James Chrisholm
The people who run disease control are also involved in vaccines. So there is also a potential conflict of interests.

【回复】负责疾病控制的人员也参与了疫苗工作，因此也存在着潜在的利益冲突。

Dawei Chen
actually in China also not everyone like wear a mask in public area. Most people will loose when there is no cases been reported.

【回复】其实在中国也不是每个人都喜欢在公共场合戴口罩。当没有病例报告时，大多数人都会放松警惕。

Tony Leung
The Chinese take it seriously. PVG Pudong airport has had a back log of air cargo because they found some ground terminal staff got infected with the Delta variant. So the government came down hard. Asked the ground crews to wear mask and PPE gowns while loading and unloading. Can you imagine doing physical work in 30s degree Celsius and high humidity? Plus the staff have been asked to work in shifts 1 week on and then 1 week off in isolation. Some of the ground staff could not accept this so they quit. So now we have a situation of under staffing. I was talking to our PVG agent and she told me supposedly a few flights flew out of PVG empty because there were nobody to load the planes. They expect the short staff situation will sort itself out in 2 weeks. A similar situation developed in PEK Beijing as well but not as severe.

【回复】中国人很重视它。PVG浦东机场积压了一批航空货物，因为他们发现一些地面航站的工作人员感染了德尔塔变种。所以政府采取了严厉的措施。要求地面人员在装卸货物时佩戴口罩和个人防护装备。你能想象在三十摄氏度的高温高湿的环境下做体力活吗？另外，工作人员被要求轮班工作一周，然后在隔离状态下休息一周。一些地面工作人员无法接受，所以他们辞职了。所以现在我们出现了人手不足的情况。我和我们的PVG代理商谈过，她告诉我，据说有几个航班是空着飞出PVG的，因为没有人给飞机装货。他们预计员工短缺的情况将在两周内自行解决。PEK北京首都国际机场也出现了类似的情况，但没有那么严重。

Dawei Chen
Yes, you really know china well. That exactly what we have done.

【回复】是的，你真的很了解中国。这正是我们所做的。
-------------------------------------------------------

Tony Histbook Educator (1998-present)
There are a lot of commentaries related to how successful China is in controlling the Covid-19/Variant D and the continued problems of the US in trying to do the same.
Many of the commenters have expressed their views about the US in the negative manner by adding other elements to validate their claim but in all of it, aside from the poor choices that people make based on their own misguided beliefs or by influence of others, the basic issue is not being clearly explained to indicate the real reason. In a simple note, the US is not the same as China.

【回答】教育工作者(1988年-至今)
关于中国在控制新冠病毒/变种病毒方面取得了多大成功，以及美国在试图做同样的事情方面仍然存在的问题，有很多的评论。
许多评论者以负面的方式表达了他们对美国的看法，通过添加其他元素来证实他们的说法，但总的来说，除了人们基于自己被误导的信仰或者受他人影响而做出的糟糕选择之外，基本问题并没有得到清楚的解释，以指出真正的原因。简而言之，美国与中国不同。

China, is since 1949 a single party state. And which has the total control over the nation. In such a state, there is very little difficulties in requiring its citizens to follow the directives and policies as enforcement is as swift and through.
In the US, the principle issue is about the level of authority the federal government has over the States and what authority the States have. Its a Constitutional issue of division of power between the federal government and the States.
Understandable that people would think this to be stupid but its what democracy is about. It is stupid at time and very messy but it involves the federal, State, local government and individuals and what their rights (to include authority) are.

中国，自1949年以来就是一党制国家。对国家拥有完全的治理权。在这样的国家里，要求公民遵守指令和政策几乎没有什么困难，实施也同样迅速和彻底。
在美国，主要的问题是联邦政府对各州的权力水平，以及各州拥有什么样的权力。这是联邦政府和州政府之间权力分配的宪法问题。
人们会认为这很愚蠢，可以理解，但这就是民主的意义所在。它有时很愚蠢，而且非常混乱，但它涉及到联邦、州、地方政府和个人以及他们的权利(包括权力)是什么。

There was a time when the most of the people and the States did follow the directives of the national government but that’s long past. In the current times its more about questioning the federal government and assuming that it does not have the authority needed to make the directives and policies that both the States and the people must follow.
As it is today, its about wrong assumptions on the part of the protesting population and political leaderships of the States. For those protesting that mandates for mask/safety/health is wrong and violates the rights of individuals. Wrong in that these individuals listen to their favorite commentators who are themselves wrong in their information that they use to promote their beliefs. State leadership and State representatives for the most part are more interested in self promoting and power promotion than doing what they should be, taking care of their citizens and constituent. Simply that self interest is more the center than caring for one’s neighbors and apply common sense.

曾经有一段时间，大多数人和州都遵循国家政府的指示，但那已经是很久以前的事了。在当前时代，更多的是质疑联邦政府，认为它没有必要的权力来制定各州和人们都必须遵循的指令和政策。
就像今天的情况一样，这是关于抗议人群和各州政治领导人的错误设想。对于那些抗议戴口罩/安全/健康的规定是错误的，侵犯了个人权利的人。错就错在这些人听信了他们最喜欢的评论员，而这些评论员在他们用来宣传自己信仰的信息上也是错误的。大多数州领导人和州代表更感兴趣的是自我宣传和权力提升，而不是做他们应该做的事情，即照顾他们的公民和选民。简单地说，自我利益比照顾邻居和运用常识更重要。

Peter Wheeler works at Airline Transport Pilot (2011-present)
There is more to it than this.
Yes, China is doing a good job at controlling the Delta variant.
However and for example, Melbourne Australia has imposed a number of strict lockdowns. I do not suggest they are exactly the same as the Chinese lockdowns, but they are similar in reach, purpose and strictness. Yet, Melbourne Australia has struggled to control the virus at every stage. The economic cost and social cost has been very high, and for results that are not especially great.
If the Chinese wish to impose strict lockdowns, that is a matter for them. In other countries with other systems in place, lockdowns may not be particularly effective or the affected people may conduct a cost-benefit analysis to decide that they are undesirable.

【回答】航空运输飞行员（2011年-至今）
事情远不止如此。
是的，中国在控制德尔塔变种方面做得很好。
然而，例如，澳大利亚墨尔本已经实施了一些严格的封锁。我并不是说它们和中国的封锁政策完全一样，但是它们在范围、目的和严格性上很相似。然而，澳大利亚墨尔本一直在每个阶段努力控制病毒。经济成本和社会成本一直非常高，而且效果也不是特别大。
如果中国人希望实施严格的封锁，那是他们自己的事情。在其他有不同制度的国家，封锁可能不是特别有效，或者受影响的人们，可能会进行成本效益分析，以决定这些做法是不可取的。

For a second example, New Zealand, other Pacific Islands and the Australian state of Western Australia have employed isolation as a COVID strategy. This is far less costly than a strict lockdown, and would appear to have been more successful. Therefore, the Chinese model is certainly not “the most successful”. All we can say is that it has met the expectations of China, and that is all we need to say.
China has been successful in controlling the Delta variant (yes) compared to any other nation (no). Is it time America & others follow the Chinese model with stringent lockdowns? (not necessarily)

第二个例子是，新西兰、其他太平洋岛屿和澳大利亚西澳大利亚州已经将隔离作为新冠疫情的战略。这比严格封锁的成本要低得多，而且看起来更加成功。所以，中国模式肯定不是“最成功的”。我们只能说，它达到了中国的期望，这就是我们要说的全部。
中国已经成功地控制了德尔塔变种(是)，与其他任何国家相比(不)。美国和其他国家是时候效仿中国模式进行严格的封锁了吗？(不一定)

Thomas Pauken II B.A. from Thomas More College of Liberal Arts (1999)
BEIJING: The Delta variant infection has been spreading across the globe while a few cases were reported in China last month.
Nonetheless, the virus did not have a devastating impact here as elsewhere. Nevertheless, the anti-China doomsayers were quick to forecast dire outcomes.
Gordon G. Chang, author of The Coming Collapse of China, posted a Tweet claiming the Delta variant would spell the end of China.
Needless to say, he was proven wrong yet again. The Coronavirus has done nothing more than inflict added inconveniences for the Chinese.
The Chinese did not panic and the government didn’t impose strict lockdowns, similar to Australia in recent months. Instead, the Chinese government went ahead with business as usual but placed tougher social distancing measures and inter-city travel restrictions for a few weeks.

【回答】托马斯莫尔文学院学士(1999年)
北京：德尔塔变种已经在全球范围内蔓延，上个月中国报告了几例病例。
尽管如此，这种病毒并没有像其他地方那样对这里造成毁灭性的影响。然而，那些反华的悲观论者很快就预言可怕的结果。章家墩发了一条推文，声称德尔塔变种将意味着中国的终结。
不用说，他又一次被证明是错误的。疫情除了给中国人带来更多的不便之外，什么也没有。
中国人没有恐慌，政府也没有像澳大利亚最近几个月那样实施严格的封锁。相反，中国照常行事，但在数周内采取了更严格的社交隔离措施和城际旅行限制。

I was asked to work-at-home. I did not feel inconvenienced by it since I prefer this option for working. All the shops and public facilities in my neighborhood, as well as across the capital city stayed open.
The security guards were more rigorous about conducting body temperature checks and reviewing health apps for all people entering buildings.
Nonetheless, the entrance checks have become routine in all Chinese cities. Requirements for people to wear face masks on public transportation have stayed in effect since the early months of last year.
Many Chinese have already received their Covid-19 vaccination shots and the country is expected to reach herd immunity by the end of this year, with an 80% vaccinated population.

我被要求在家工作。我对此没有感到不方便，因为我更喜欢这种工作方式。我所在街区以及整个首都的所有商店和公共设施都照常营业。
保安在进行体温检查和审查所有进入大楼的人的健康APP方面更加严格。
尽管如此，在中国所有的城市，入口检查已经成为例行公事。自去年年初以来，一直实施着公共交通工具上人们佩戴口罩的规定。
许多中国人已经接种了新冠疫苗，预计到今年年底，中国将有80%的人口接种疫苗，达到群体免疫。

It’s reported that public health practitioners had administered about 1.9 billion jabs to the people residing in China, as of August 25th.
The Chinese have been very cooperative to follow social distancing measures, wearing face masks, getting vaccinated and closely monitoring local health conditions.
The country reported no new confirmed local infections on August 22, the first time since late July, according to the National Health Commission.
The vigilance of the Chinese government and local public is why the country had succeeded to keep the Delta variant at bay. Shortly after a few cases were reported in the country, local health officials had gone into overdrive to limit the spread of the virus.

据报道，截至8月25日，公共卫生从业人员已经给居住在中国的人群接种了大约19亿剂。
中国人一直非常合作地遵循社交距离的措施，戴口罩，接种疫苗，密切监测当地的健康状况。
根据中国卫生委员会的报告，中国在8月22日没有新的确诊感染病例，这是自7月下旬以来的首次。
中国政府和当地民众的警惕是中国成功遏制德尔塔变种的原因。在中国报告了几例病例后不久，当地卫生官员就开始超负荷工作，以遏制病毒的传播。

China stood well prepared to handle the Delta variant and the nation has had remarkable success to tackle the Coronavirus, while many countries across the globe have failed to curb the spread. Perhaps Chinese culture could explain why they have performed so well.
The Chinese support a community-centered approach to living. They believe the good of the community should be of greater importance than individual.
Hence, they are willing to make sacrifices and give up some of their liberties to protect the well-being of the community.
Accordingly, the Chinese did not feel frustrated about wearing face masks, although many Westerners were strongly against it at the early stages of the pandemic last year.

中国为应对德尔塔变种病毒已经做好了充分的准备，并且在应对新冠病毒方面取得了显著成功，而全球许多国家却未能遏制这种病毒的蔓延。也许中国文化可以解释为什么他们表现得这么好。
中国人支持以社会为中心的生活方式。他们认为社会的利益应该比个人的利益更重要。
所以，他们愿意做出牺牲，放弃一些自由，以保护社会的利益。
因此，中国人对戴口罩并不感到沮丧，尽管在去年大流行的早期，许多西方人强烈反对戴口罩。

As reported by the Global Times:“Whether the epidemic in smaller cities would spread remain unknown, but the failings in epidemic controls at airports and other facilities for coping with international arrivals must be addressed urgently, experts said. With the experience accumulated in fighting the outbreak in Wuhan and in containing the sporadic outbreaks in other Chinese locations, for example, the June outbreak linked to the Delta variant in South China's Guangdong Province, the latest outbreaks are expected to be successfully contained.”
China continues to set the right example to curb the spread of the Coronavirus and its subsequent variants.

据《环球时报》报道 ”专家表示，小城市的疫情是否会蔓延，仍然是个未知数，但是机场和其他应对国际入境者的设施，在疫情控制方面的失败必须得到紧急解决。凭借在武汉抗击疫情和控制中国其他地区零感染方面积累的经验，例如，6月份的疫情与中国南方广东省的德尔塔变种有关，预计最近的疫情将得到成功控制。”
中国继续树立正确的榜样，以遏制新冠病毒及其后续变种的扩散。

Julien Hurault former Senior Systems Engineer at Hewlett-Packard (1998-2003)
Wherever when does what they're told to do. No morons refusing to wear masks or refusing to get vaccinated. I do not in any way support this system, but in the case of a pandemic like this, having everybody cooperate and do the right thing works.

【回答】前惠普高级系统工程师(1998年-2003年)
无论何时何地，只要他们被告知要做什么，他们就会去做。没有白痴拒绝戴口罩或拒绝接种疫苗。我绝不支持这个体制，但是在这场大流行之下，让每个人合作，做正确的事情是有用的。

Joseph Wang studied at Ph.D Astronomy UT Austin, Physics MIT
It's likely too late for that.
One thing about China is that because previous lock downs have been successful, you have a lot less lock down fatigue, and you have more public support for strong measures.
Also the recent lock downs haven't been that strict. One thing about China is that it's been spending the last year developing huge capacity to trace. So when you have a dozen cases, you can immediately identify the cluster and react to it
The thing about these things is that it is difficult just to follow models.
Also there are economic issues. So if you to look at most Americans, they are in debt and are living from paycheck to paycheck. The thing about most Chinese is that even poor people have either money in the bank or relatives that they can count on.
So if you go straight lockdown, Chinese tend to have savings that they can use to avoid disaster, whereas Americans dont. This means that there is a lot more political pressure to lift lockdowns in the US than in Chiina.

【回答】毕业于美国麻省理工大学奥斯汀分校，天文学博士学位
现在这样做可能已经太晚了。
关于中国的一件事是，因为以前的封锁已经成功，你有更少的封锁疲劳，你有更多的公众支持强有力的措施。
而且最近的封锁也没有那么严格。关于中国的另一件事是，它去年一直在开发巨大的追踪能力。这样，当你出现十几个病例时，你就可以立即识别该集群，并对其作出反应。
关于这些事情的问题是，仅仅遵循模型是很困难的。
此外还有经济问题。所以，如果你看看大多数美国人，他们负债累累，生活拮据。对于大多数中国人来说，即使是穷人也有银行存款，或者有可以依靠的亲戚。
因此，如果你直接封锁，中国人往往有储蓄，可以用来躲避灾难，而美国人没有。这意味着，解除封锁的政治压力，美国要比中国大得多。
-------------------------------------------------------

Nicholas Yoong
The media at it again.
New Zealand has its outbreak and they are trying.
They are doing everything China did except the population mass testing.
Probably settled within a month.
Where did I get one month from?
China.

【回复】媒体又来了。
新西兰爆发了疫情，他们正在努力。
他们正在做中国所做的一切，除了大规模人口检测。
可能一个月内就会平息下来。
我要从哪里得到一个月？
中国。

T Zhao
It is not late, it is just impossible in the West.
There is a core group of people in Western nation will never believe or consent to lock down, vaccines or even wearing mask. These people represent somewhere between 10–20% of the total population in the West. They are the perfect host for the virus to mutate and propagate.
On top of that , due to lack of central government control, North Americans have no strict policies from region to region. West democracy does not work well with pandemic!

【回复】现在还不算晚，只是在西方不可能的。
在西方国家，有一个核心群体永远不会相信或同意封锁、疫苗、甚至戴口罩。这些人占西方总人口的10%-20%。它们是病毒变异和繁殖的完美宿主。
最重要的是，由于缺乏中央政府的控制，北美各地没有严格的政策。西方民主不适用于疫情！

Joseph Wang
Well it depends on individual people. Trump is a salesman, so if he wanted to get people to wear masks, he could have sold that. He didnt.
People matter.

【作者回复】嗯，这取决于个人。特朗普是个推销员，所以如果他想让人们戴上口罩，他本可以推销它。他没有。
人很重要。

T Zhao
I think we agree. Democracy is about each person’s rights instead of the good of the society.
I hear too often pandemic policy of - “ we strongly recommend “ , “ people should”….etc.
When policy makers hesitate to set strict rule based policy with enforcement, but with only recommendations, it will not change these 10–20% of people’s mind.
Why do we have strict speed limits Or traffic laws? Do we rely on politicians to sell these traffic laws?

【回复】我想我们都同意。民主是关于每个人的权利，而不是社会的利益。
我经常听到这样的防疫政策，“我们强烈建议”、“人们应该”... 等等。
当政策制定者在制定严格的基于规则的执行政策时犹豫不决，而只是提出建议，不会改变这10%至20%的人的想法。
为什么我们有严格的限速或交通法规？我们是依靠政客来推销这些交通法规吗？

Mel Victor
These 20% are diehards “Give me liberty or give me deaths”. Well, the virus gave them the freedom to choose death.

【回复】20%的这些人是死硬派“要么给我自由，要么给我死亡”。好了，病毒给了他们选择死亡的自由。

Nicholas Yoong
It does. Look at Taiwan and Australia. Australia is the biggest example in fact.
It's the type of people. People don't work well with pandemics in America. Unless it's bird flu.
But in short, democracy doesn't work well with crises.
Or war.
These two words are what the Americans might wanna take note of.

【回复】确实。看看台湾和澳大利亚，澳大利亚就是最大的例子。
这就那类人。在美国，人们不能很好地应对大流行，除非是禽流感。
但简而言之，民主不能很好地应对危机。
或者战争。
这两个词也许是美国人需要注意的。

Zyra Q
Although it’s late, it’s still necessery. It must take effect much fater than just let go on controlling covid-19. Thorough lockdown can control virus within 3 months. However the govt and people can’t bear the short-term lost. China and Chinese indeed paid a lot. But every Chinese can understand and obey government’s policy. Even many company bosses got bankup and employees lost their jobs. If America govt do this, the present president will be pretty difficult to win votes at the next election. Especially the other party will grap this opportunity to blame.
And also I don’t think American govt can execute as strictly as China does. China takes very rigorous punishment on those officials and people who don’t comply the antiepidemic policies. Officials will lost their jobs and go to jail.

【回复】虽然现在已经很晚了，但仍有必要。它(严格的封锁)肯定比放任能更快地发挥疫情控制的作用。全面封锁可以在3个月内控制病毒。然而，政府和人们无法承受短期的损失。中国和中国人确实付出了很多。但是每个中国人都能理解和服从政府的政策。甚至许多公司老板也破产了，员工也丢了工作。如果美国政府这样做，现任总统将很难在下次选举中赢得选票。特别是对方会抓住这个机会来指责。
而且我也不认为美国政府能像中国那样严格执行。中国对那些不遵守防疫政策的官员和人们采取非常严厉的惩罚措施。官员们将丢掉工作，锒铛入狱。
-------------------------------------------------------

Anonymous
No. Western nations will never admit that China’s handling of the lockdown has been far more successful. To praise China is to admit that China can be more successful than a democracy. You can’t say that. You’re not allowed. Our PM, Justin Trudeau took a lot of heat for saying something like that several years ago. Remember: China bad!
Despite China’s relative success in stopping the spread of the virus, the only news we get about China is when something bad happens. Seriously. There is a very obvious anti-China narrative in the west. You can look up other answers on Quora that show how western media portrays China versus western nations. Here’s an example:
To fight the coronavirus, China placed nearly 60 million people under lockdown and instituted strict quarantine and travel restrictions for hundreds of millions of others. lts campaign has come at great cost to people's livelihoods and personal liberties.
Breaking News: ltaly is locking down Milan,Venice and much of its north, risking its economy in an effort to contain Europe's worst coronavirus outbreak.

【回答】
不会。西方国家永远不会承认，中国对封锁的处理要成功得多。赞扬中国就是承认中国可以比民主国家更成功。你不能这么说。这是不允许的。我们的总理贾斯汀·特鲁多，几年前因为说了这样的话而受到了很多批评。要记住：中国孬！
尽管中国在阻止疫情扩散方面取得了相对的成功，但我们得到的关于中国的唯一消息，就是当有不好的事情发生的时候。说真的。西方有一种非常明显的反华言论。你可以在QA上找到其他回答，这些回答展示了西方媒体是如何描述中国与西方国家的。下面是一个例子：
“为了抗击新冠疫情，中国封锁了近6000万人，并对其他数亿人实施了严格的隔离和旅行限制。这场运动让人们的生活和自由付出了巨大的代价。”
“突发新闻：意大利正在封锁米兰、威尼斯和其北部大部分地区，冒着经济风险，努力遏制欧洲最严重的新冠疫情爆发。”

Buerni Loo
NO! They will never do this.
Unless you say: Is it time America & others follow the New Zealand model plus a bit more strict rules?
But even you say so, there will be others say: No, you were following Chinese model, you loser!
That’s how they decide not to do anything, even 1 month effort can stop everything, they will choose to protract this to 5 years.

【回答】
不！他们永远不会这么做的。
除非你说：现在是美国和其他国家效仿新西兰模式，再加上更严格规则的时候了吗？
但即使你这么说，也会有人说：不，你是在效仿中国模式，你这个失败者！
这就是他们决定什么都不做的原因，即使一个月的努力就能阻止一切，他们也会选择拖到五年。

Chiang Seng Erh Retired
Following China, a developing country??? Our leader, the USA will lose face. They will rather cull human to save economy and their political power!

【回答】退休人员
效仿中国，一个发展中国家？？？我们的领袖，美国会丢脸的。他们宁可屠杀人类，来挽救经济和他们的政治权力！
-------------------------------------------------------

Justin Snow
According to official numbers the only country doing better than them is North Korea with absolutely no cases at all. Now I’m not saying the US is doing a good job at all, however I am saying that a densely populated nation and questionable hygiene in many areas reporting so few cases should make you wonder if they’re reporting accurately or not.

【回复】根据官方数据，唯一比他们做得更好的国家是朝鲜，完全没有任何病例。现在我并不是说美国做得很好，但是我要说的是，一个人口密集的国家，很多地区的卫生状况也很糟糕，报告的病例却很少，这应该让你怀疑他们的报告是否准确。

Chiang Seng Erh
That suspicion is understandable. The important thing is their economy is surging now. If China can produce that level of economy with many, many millions of sick and dead people, I think the USA should be even more worried!!!

【作者回复】这种怀疑是可以理解的。重要的是，他们的经济正在蓬勃发展。如果中国能够用数以百万计的病人和死者创造出这样的经济水平，我认为美国应该更加担心！！！

Justin Snow
Worried about what? Chinas economy is based on cheap manufacturing and possibly India can provide right now due to an abundance of very cheap labor.

【回复】担心什么？中国的经济是建立在廉价制造业的基础上的，也许印度现在就能提供，因为印度有大量非常廉价的劳动力。

Chiang Seng Erh
Oh, no worry is fine. Happy to know that. Enjoy yourselves!

【作者回复】噢，不用担心就好。很高兴知道这一点。开心就好！
-------------------------------------------------------