Coronavirus - those in China, and general discussion

[realmayo]

12 hours ago, roddy said:

Strong contender for the November least necessary forcing in of left/right politics award there, but the month is young...

Of course the virus has circulated more enthusiastically in recent weeks thanks to those on the right encouraging commerce, so I'd say honours are even.

 

8 hours ago, Flickserve said:

Also worth pointing out we knew far less more about the disease in February.

Well China knew enough about it to (a) lock down Hubei, and (b) tell other countries not to stop international flights from China.

 

10 hours ago, icebear said:

I suspect this is the reason they haven't explicitly banned incoming travel by foreigners, when their policy since April has been close to equivalent.

Part of me wonders whether it might not be good for morale in the PRC, to show westerners desperate to gain entry to such a coronafree haven and model of moral governance.

What's particularly frustrating is that while China is indeed just-about open, its neighbours aren't. Or are, but with even more restrictions: for instance, from what I can understand with Taiwan, existing university degree students can enter the country but not language students.

 

[Lu]

13 hours ago, realmayo said:

(Some of the liberal left in the West was also of course very opposed to closing borders to people from coronavirus hotspots.)

Yah, I was one of them. I've changed my mind since, closing the borders was a wise move where possible. It was a major problem for a lot of people (people got stuck in countries where they had no intention of being, unable to care for people/pets/jobs that depended on them etc), but stopping travel that was not strictly necessary was a good move.

[Jan Finster]

On 11/1/2020 at 5:28 PM, icebear said:

Currently, if you test positive, you are treated as a positive case, regardless of "if you had coronavirus at some point in the past" or currently.

 

This does not make any sense. Someone antibody positive and PCR negative would probably be the safest person they could let into their country. ?

Great, so if I have antibodies, I am screwed until we have eradicated COVID worldwide, which will probably only be 2025 or so....?

 

Edit: apparently they are getting nervous if you are IgM antibody positive, which somewhat makes sense since this reflects a recent infection. I guess if you were IgM negative and IgG positive,  you would be allowed to enter since this would reflect an infection some while ago and a lasting immunity (well we do not know about lasting yet).

[Flickserve]

2 hours ago, realmayo said:

Well China knew enough about it to (a) lock down Hubei, and (b) tell other countries not to stop international flights from China

Indeed.. Closing flights on such a scale was unprecedented in modern history. I was rather doubtful myself on necessity of stopping international flights - flights didn’t stop during SARS. I figure the huge record breaking dinner event in Wuhan might have been a significant factor for closing the city. 

 

locking down Wuhan and Hubei was a very courageous or desperate action which ever way you want to look at. We can see how delays to lockdown or more stringent controls facilitate virus spread 

[Demonic_Duck]

1 hour ago, Jan Finster said:

This does not make any sense. Someone antibody positive and PCR negative would probably be the safest person they could let into their country. ?

Great, so if I have antibodies, I am screwed until we have eradicated COVID worldwide, which will probably only be 2025 or so....?

 

Edit: apparently they are getting nervous if you are IgM antibody positive, which somewhat makes sense since this reflects a recent infection. I guess if you were IgM negative and IgG positive,  you would be allowed to enter since this would reflect an infection some while ago and a lasting immunity (well we do not know about lasting yet).

 

That's interesting, the policy would seem to make a lot more sense in light of that. Would be nice to see some official confirmation of this distinction, though... I guess we might be waiting a while though, given how much the Chinese state values transparency and clear communication...

[Jan Finster]

48 minutes ago, Demonic_Duck said:

That's interesting, the policy would seem to make a lot more sense in light of that.

 

Here is just a paper FYI (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7202656/ )

"IgM levels increased during the first week after SARS‐CoV‐2 infection, peaked 2 weeks and then reduced to near‐background levels in most patients. IgG was detectable after 1 week and was maintained at a high level for a long period... "

 

Yes, let us hope the Chinese do this rationally.

[889]

As of November 4, non-Chinese cannot enter China from the UK, with extremely limited exceptions.

 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1205767.shtml

[mungouk]

Wow! I got in just in time.
 

Here's the embassy announcement: http://www.chinese-embassy.org.uk/eng/visa/notice/t1829529.htm

 

[889]

And yet only the UK has been banned.

 

The embassy must have seen that chart projecting 4000 deaths/day.

[roddy]

 Belgium as well, according to the World Service, but I’m on a cross trainer so someone else can fact check. 

[mungouk]

Nationals of the UK, Belgium and Philippines according to SCMP

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3108584/coronavirus-china-closes-door-british-belgian-and-philippine

 

Although this is surely incorrect and should say non-Chinese nationals travelling from those countries...

[mungouk]

18 hours ago, mungouk said:

UK, Belgium and Philippines

 

Also Bangladesh: http://bd.china-embassy.org/eng/lsyw/lstx/t1829557.htm

 

Edit: And India http://in.china-embassy.org/eng/sggg/t1829642.htm

[carlo]

Italy as well.

[mungouk]

and so it goes on...

 

"Foreign nationals from 6 more countries are banned from entry"

 

https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/LgX3ziakcYlH1_ExhVMWBA

 

Quote

 

France

Russia

Italy

Ukraine

India

Ethiopia

UK

Belgium

Bangladesh

Philippines

 

 

[889]

Isn't there a surprisingly large omission?

[mungouk]

USA?  That's been puzzling me too.

[mungouk]

Statement from MFA today, explaining the thinking behind increased testing (like IgM):

http://www.chinese-embassy.org.uk/eng/PressandMedia/Spokepersons/t1830244.htm

 

Quote

 

Important: Foreign Ministry Spokesperson's Remarks on Negative Nucleic Acid and Anti-Body Blood Tests Results and Other Epidemic Containment Issues
2020/11/07

Q: I have three questions on epidemic containment. First, can you tell us the considerations behind the recent notices published by Chinese embassies overseas that require more strict measures on passengers taking international flights to China? Second, among all the recent measures people are most focusing on the requirement of "certificates of negative nucleic acid and IgM anti-body test results". Can you tell us if there are some specific considerations? Third, people are also following the requirement that travelers going to China via connecting flights will need to test twice. Could you tell us why this is necessary?

 

A: On your first question, as the epidemic situation overseas is getting worse, China is facing greater risks of imported cases. In October, the number of imported cases grew by 45 percent compared with that in September. In the meantime, some domestic cases were also found. Under such circumstances, we have learned from other countries' practices and further strengthened pre-departure prevention and control measures for travelers coming to China. This helps not only preserve the hard-won epidemic containment results in China, but also minimize the risk of cross infection during the travel and safeguard people's health and security.

 

On your second question, the pre-departure nucleic acid testing for China-bound travelers has been essential in preventing epidemic importation. However, none of the existing test methods can be 100 percent accurate at the moment. According to the competent authorities, IgM anti-body test results are stable, and the passengers' test results can be a lot more accurate if the test methods are combined. That's why we now need IgM anti-body testing, too. We tried this in some countries earlier, and the effect was good. As I know, similar measures have been taken by some other countries, too.

 

On your third question, as I just said, the epidemic situation overseas is very serious. Every time a passenger traveling to China transits in one more place, he or she will face greater risks of infection. Judging from previous imported cases, many people who had tested negative before traveling got infected later, the number of which accounted for nearly half of the imported cases. Therefore, an additional test in the transit place is necessary for epidemic prevention and control. At the same time, if you really need to make cross-border trips, we advise you to properly plan your route and try to choose direct flights and avoid transit as much as possible.

 

 

[Saxondale]

@mungoukhow's freedom? 

[mungouk]

10 hours ago, Saxondale said:

how's freedom?

 

Pretty damn good, thanks! 

 

[roddy]

"But they will never take our dodgy lager!"