From the bubonic plague to COVID-19, why locks seem to remain

A year after the closure in the Chinese city of Wuhan shocked the world, the tactic appears to be a lasting tool to suppress the coronavirus almost everywhere.

When the first large-scale exclusion in modern times was implemented in China on January 23 at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was then considered unproven and unthinkable, especially by democratic governments that have implications for human rights violations of civil liberties. of movement on such a large scale.

In just under 12 months, the UK is in the midst of its third nationwide exclusion as it battles a mutated strain of the coronavirus. In Australia, the recent discovery of one case in Brisbane has led to a three-day closure. And China, which is experiencing its biggest outbreak since the start of the pandemic with more than 500 cases, closed three cities around Beijing this month.

‘Before COVID-19, there was a strong global health discourse that argued against exclusions and similar mass quarantines. It’s just one thought that the current pandemic has overturned, ”said Nicholas Thomas, associate professor of health security at City University of Hong Kong.

“As far as possible, locks will be part of the essential toolkit that governments can use to address the ongoing as well as future outbreaks,” he said.

War measures

The speed with which China shut down millions of people when the pandemic broke out was the first time that the measure was taken to such an extent in modern times.

Until last year, severe barriers were synonymous with the waves of bubonic plague that swept through Europe from the 14th century. Even during the Spanish flu in the early 20th century, no lockouts were introduced centrally. However, in recent history, China has imposed three major roadblocks: during a bubonic plague in 1901 in the northeast, and two shortly after the Sichuan earthquake in 2008 and another amid a bubonic plague in 2014 in Gansu province.

Foreign countries that were surprised during the Wuhan lockdown did the same thing only months later when the virus spread uncontrollably.

After an infectious disease has reached a certain number of people, barriers cannot be avoided because no other measure can spread, said Jiang Qingwu, a professor of epidemiology at Fudan University in Shanghai.

However, it is clear that there remains a large gap between what the Chinese government is able to impose on its citizens during a lockout compared to democracies. Local authorities have always been quick to state what the government often refers to as ‘wartime’ as a response to a relatively low number of infections, but also to ensure its compliance through actions such as closing down the flats completely. In some cases, people may not go out to get food, but deliveries are arranged instead.

According to the authors of a study conducted by Bloomberg Economics and comparing how democracies have fared with more authoritarian countries in dealing with the pandemic, ‘a quick and strict closure is a kind of knee-jerk reaction that comes more naturally to authoritarian as well as democratic regimes. ”

In China’s latest exclusion in Shijiazhuang, the capital of Hebei province, the strict measures are reminiscent of those of the Wuhan lockdown, which ended on April 8 after infections declined to zero. Residents in the northeastern city, 290 kilometers southwest of Beijing, must stay at home for seven days while the city begins a second round of mass testing for the entire population of 11 million, as the cases in the region exceed 500. Flights and trains to and from the city were discontinued, as was almost all public transportation.

By contrast, democracies such as the United Kingdom, in their versions of locks, have generally allowed people to leave home to buy necessities such as food and medicine, walk or exercise with their dogs. Schools remained open in France’s autumn locks, while Israel closes in the last two weeks of the month, allowing people to gather outside in groups of up to ten, with exemptions for religious activities.

But there were also examples of democratic governments imposing extreme rules. One state government in Australia, where officials reacted vehemently to the flare-up, banned even extra-mural exercises and dog walking during a brief shutdown in November.

Winter revival

Chinese authorities argue that the country’s return to the crisis proves that their approach works. And a winter revival of the virus in countries such as South Korea, Japan and Sweden, which was initially successful with a minimal disruption approach that avoided barriers, underscores the argument for stricter measures, especially as tired citizens are advised to stay at home .

“Given the large number and high density of China, we have proven that (these measures) are very effective,” said Mi Feng, a spokesman for the country’s National Health Commission.

In addition to concerns about civil liberties, many governments remain reluctant to impose the kind of complete barriers seen in China because of the economic cost – although research by the International Monetary Fund’s latest World Economic Outlook has shown that countries would certainly decide to take such measures. to take. , they performed better in terms of protecting the economy. New Zealand is one such example: only 25 deaths are recorded after being locked up quickly, while life would return to normal shortly thereafter.

However, even China, whose economy has come back to life, is known for economic pressures. Since the closure of Wuhan, the authorities have clearly stated that they need to close economically significant cities like Beijing, despite major boom. Officials largely turned to aggressive contact detection during an outbreak in the capital last summer.

“Effective as connections are expensive,” said Yanzhong Huang, director of the Center for Global Health Studies, at Seton Hall University in New Jersey. “Even for China, it’s unsustainable in the long run, ‘he adds, comparing reflection decisions to’ shooting cannonballs at mosquitoes. ‘

As vaccinations spread rapidly in large western countries and China, the hope is that locks will be much less common in 2021, although there is still great uncertainty about how long it will take to vaccinate enough of the world population to re-vaccinate safely. to take in. opens the world economy.

Despite the economic implications, the legacy of COVID-19 is likely that barriers will continue in the future during outbreaks of highly communicable diseases, especially as it is now known to people everywhere for the first time in a century.

“Restrictive quarantine itself is not a new invention and its application dates back to the Black Death in the Middle Ages,” Huang said. “But it is ironic that such an old method remains the most effective despite the tremendous advances in the medical sciences.”