author | curator Mr. Kai | author
source | Volunteer Cloud Home
(zhiyuanyunzhijia)
1
Seeing the interest demands behind the diverse opinions
In the face of the epidemic, different people, based on different positions, will have different voices.
Ass determines thinking, and interests drive concepts.
In the past few years during the epidemic, there have been two common voices in the public opinion field - "clearing" and "coexisting" .
Regarding these two voices, we cannot just say who is right and who is wrong.
Rather, we need to see the different interests and demands represented behind these two voices.
The adult world is never about emotions, but about considering costs and weighing the pros and cons.
To give a very realistic example:
Liu is my high school classmate. He worked in an Internet company after graduating from college.
In the first two years of the epidemic, he can be said to be a staunch "clearance fan."
At that time, he did not feel the threat to him from the epidemic. In fact, because he often "worked from home", he felt better than before the epidemic. Do you want to clear
? Do you want to support national policies? That must be necessary.
I can still get my salary, and it can also prevent the spread of virus and protect everyone's life and health. Of course, such a good policy that benefits the country and the people must be supported unswervingly.
But this year, the company overturned, and he was forced to lose his job. He planned to go out and find a new job. The frequent lockdowns made it difficult for him to move.
Without the source of income, the pressure of reality is coming.
Not to mention anything else, just the mortgage on his body was like a ghost that was trying to kill him, constantly spurring him on.
The bank will not open up to you just because you have lost your job or have been banned from home.
At this time, whether to clear it is no longer his main concern. He just wants to know when he can be released and he can quickly find a job to make a living.
This is the reality, it is very skinny, but it is a problem that we have to face squarely.
Not everyone’s job is to guarantee harvests despite droughts and floods.
The job is very stable and there is not much risk of unemployment. If it were me, I would prefer to stick to the clearing side.
My own freedom may be subject to some restrictions, but it is better than increasing the risk of infection, not to mention that there are elderly and children at home.
But because of the epidemic, those who have lost their jobs and have difficulty making ends meet have different attitudes.
In the short term, they may be able to survive, but in the long term, what can they do? They have to live.
If you have an elderly person at home, you need to support them, right? If you have children, it costs money to go to school, right? If you buy a house with a loan, you need to repay the mortgage, right? If you open a shop to do small business, do you need to pay rent...
These all cost money, and no one will pay for you.
When the snowflakes of the epidemic really fall on you, it will hurt.
Therefore, no matter which point of view it is, it is narrow-minded to use simple "right" and "wrong" to measure it. source | Volunteer Cloud Home (zhiyuanyunzhijia)
author | curator Mr. Kai | author
1
Seeing the interest demands behind the diverse opinions
In the face of the epidemic, different people, based on different positions, will have different voices.
Ass determines thinking, and interests drive concepts.
In the past few years during the epidemic, there have been two common voices in the public opinion field - "clearing" and "coexisting" .
Regarding these two voices, we cannot just say who is right and who is wrong.
Rather, we need to see the different interests and demands represented behind these two voices.
The adult world is never about emotions, but about considering costs and weighing the pros and cons.
To give a very realistic example:
Liu is my high school classmate. He worked in an Internet company after graduating from college.
In the first two years of the epidemic, he can be said to be a staunch "clearance fan."
At that time, he did not feel the threat to him from the epidemic. In fact, because he often "worked from home", he felt better than before the epidemic. Do you want to clear
? Do you want to support national policies? That must be necessary.
I can still get my salary, and it can also prevent the spread of virus and protect everyone's life and health. Of course, such a good policy that benefits the country and the people must be supported unswervingly.
But this year, the company overturned, and he was forced to lose his job. He planned to go out and find a new job. The frequent lockdowns made it difficult for him to move.
Without the source of income, the pressure of reality is coming.
Not to mention anything else, just the mortgage on his body was like a ghost that was trying to kill him, constantly spurring him on.
The bank will not open up to you just because you have lost your job or have been banned from home.
At this time, whether to clear it is no longer his main concern. He just wants to know when he can be released and he can quickly find a job to make a living.
This is the reality, it is very skinny, but it is a problem that we have to face squarely.
Not everyone’s job is to guarantee harvests despite droughts and floods.
The job is very stable and there is not much risk of unemployment. If it were me, I would prefer to stick to the clearing side.
My own freedom may be subject to some restrictions, but it is better than increasing the risk of infection, not to mention that there are elderly and children at home.
But because of the epidemic, those who have lost their jobs and have difficulty making ends meet have different attitudes.
In the short term, they may be able to survive, but in the long term, what can they do? They have to live.
If you have an elderly person at home, you need to support them, right? If you have children, it costs money to go to school, right? If you buy a house with a loan, you need to repay the mortgage, right? If you open a shop to do small business, do you need to pay rent...
These all cost money, and no one will pay for you.
When the snowflakes of the epidemic really fall on you, it will hurt.
Therefore, no matter which point of view it is, it is narrow-minded to use simple "right" and "wrong" to measure it.
Because behind these views, they often represent different interest groups and the thousands of families that make up this society.
They themselves have no malicious intentions. Who doesn’t hope that the epidemic will end soon, and who doesn’t hope that the country will be peaceful and the people will be safe?
Everyone’s expectations are actually the same. It’s just that different groups often have different interest demands based on their different actual situations.
We should realize the rationality of this social disparity.
In China, if we want to create a safer environment at the expense of personal freedom without affecting the livelihood of the people, I believe that the vast majority of people will not have any objections and will only complain a few times. How to block and control
, after all, safety is important. Even if you don't consider yourself, you will consider the elderly and children at home.
Unlike some Western countries, people feel uncomfortable if they don’t go out for a walk for a day. They are required to wear a mask and even ask their grandparents to advise them.
However, we all know that this assumption is unrealistic. It is impossible to want both
. There are bound to be many helpless choices in the middle.
Since it is a choice, you must weigh the pros and cons.
So, how does the country weigh it?
Why have we adopted relatively strict epidemic prevention measures in the past three years?
Now, why do we need to adjust and optimize and gradually relax control?
Only by understanding the logic behind these issues can we grasp the backbone of the current changes in epidemic prevention.
2 Three years of strict defense
December 1, 2019 ~ November 11, 2022.
In the past three years, from the outbreak of the new coronavirus in China to the introduction of the "Twenty" epidemic prevention optimization measures, our attitude towards the epidemic has basically been "prevent and defend", which is a three-year period of increasing epidemic prevention.
Why do we do this? Let’s look at a set of data first:
The United States has a population of 332 million and a total of more than 1.1 million deaths.
The United Kingdom has a population of 67.32 million and a total of about 197,000 deaths.
Germany has a population of 83.13 million and a total of about 158,000 deaths.
France, with a population of 67.5 million, currently has about 159,000 similar deaths.
Russia has a population of 143 million and a total of about 392,000 deaths.
Japan has a population of 126 million and a total of 50,608 deaths.
South Korea has a population of 51.74 million and a total of 30,847 deaths.
The population of these countries is much lower than that of China. However, India, which has the population closest to China, has published death data of more than 500,000.
But in fact, the number of deaths in India due to the epidemic is still a mystery.
Previously, the WHO had estimated that between 2020 and 2021, the number of deaths due to the new crown epidemic in India would be as high as 4.7 million.
Without these three years of strict prevention and control, India’s epidemic prevention results would be the answer.
You may say, how can India’s medical and health system compare with ours.
What about the United States? What about the UK? What about Germany?
Let’s not talk about Western countries, let’s talk about Japan. It is a developed country after all. It is the third largest economy in the world, and its per capita GDP is more than three times that of our country.
Since the epidemic was liberalized at the beginning of this year, more than 30,000 people have died in just over 10 months.
(Source: "Chaoyang News" based on official report statistics)
If this death ratio is followed, how many deaths will there be in our country can be roughly calculated.
Moreover, this is just a rigid calculation.
Our country has a large population and a vast territory, so management is undoubtedly much more difficult.
is like managing a small company with 10 people and managing a company with 100 people. The difficulty is very different.
Therefore, we must clearly understand the efforts made by the country over the years and the difficulty behind achieving such outstanding results.
Of course, this is also inseparable from the efforts and sacrifices made by each of us. 3
The change in epidemic prevention policy is extremely cautious
So, today, why do we have to change the epidemic prevention strategy again?
For a while, everyone must have felt that many places across the country are optimizing and adjusting epidemic prevention and control measures.
As of December 6, a total of 16 cities and 2 provinces in China have successively announced that citizens do not need to provide nucleic acid test certificates to enter some public places.
signal
is already obvious!
Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of Global Times , put it this way: The release of the "Ten New Articles" of sounded the decisive clarion call for China to get out of the haze of the new crown epidemic.
It is foreseeable that more places will respond in the coming days.
The old epidemic prevention model will gradually become a thing of the past, and a new epidemic prevention model is gradually taking shape.
Such a change has made many people feel a little panicked. Is it too hasty?
But we must realize that this change is definitely not the result of a sudden change. On the contrary, it is a scientific decision made based on an extremely cautious attitude and in compliance with the development situation of the epidemic.
From the end of 2019 to the end of 2022, many countries have gradually relaxed control, but we have been persisting and observing the evolution of the new coronavirus.
evolved from the original original strain to alpha, beta, gamma, then to delta , and then to today's Omicron .
We can see that the overall trend of virus evolution is that the pathogenicity is constantly weakening and the infectivity is rising.
basically conforms to Darwin's theory of evolution - the law of survival of the fittest.
The origin of the Omicron strain is still unknown, but the Omicron variant BA.1 was first discovered in Africa in November 2021.
and in just one or two months, quickly replaced delta virus and became the main new coronavirus variant in the world.
Compared with Delta virus, although Omicron is more contagious, its toxicity is significantly milder.
Therefore, starting from Omicron, " asymptomatic infected persons " became mainstream.
Based on this, more countries have chosen to relax control over the epidemic, and Japan is a typical example.
In the early days of the epidemic, Japan was also very strict in epidemic control, so it also achieved very good results.
However, in March this year, it was announced that the epidemic prevention and control measures would be completely lifted.
Japan, as one of the model students in Asia’s epidemic prevention, cannot be said to be not cautious enough in dealing with the epidemic.
But compared with it, we are undoubtedly more cautious.
Even in the face of the less pathogenic Omicron strain, we are still observing it with great caution.
We have been battling viruses for so many years. We all know that viruses mutate very quickly.
We cannot guarantee that the Omicron strain will not undergo another leapfrog evolution (that is, genetic recombination and evolution into a new virus).
We cannot guarantee whether this evolution will lead to a weaker or stronger pathogenicity.
So, we can only continue to observe.
We have been observing the Omicron virus for another year.
From the original Omicron BA.1, to BA.2, to BA.5 that is currently popular in various parts of the country, and now in Beijing, BF.7 (a sub-strain of the BA.5 variant), known as the most contagious, is raging.
It can be said that we already have a relatively comprehensive understanding of the Omikron virus.
On December 3 this year, at the 2022 Medical Virus Conference of the Chinese Medical Association, Zhang Wenhong made the latest research and judgment.
He said frankly: From the current point of view, although there are many subtypes of Omicron, its leapfrog evolution seems extremely difficult.
Moreover, the pathogenicity of and of the currently popular Omicron variant is within our acceptable range.
It can be seen from the seriousness rate of the Guangzhou epidemic:
In this round of the epidemic, Guangzhou has a cumulative infection of more than 160,000 cases, and there are only 4 severe cases, and they are all caused by underlying diseases.
has also been explained in detail by relevant people who have experienced it.
For example, recently The Paper News interviewed many Shanghai residents who have turned negative. These include elderly people in their 90s, young people in their 20s and 30s, and children as young as 6 years old.
At present, their lives have returned to normal, and there are currently no sequelae.
What are their specific experiences? Due to the limited space of this article, we will not elaborate in detail. You can refer to the article (click to view).
Judging from the current number of new international deaths, there is an obvious trend of slowing down.
This exactly reflects the "people-oriented" epidemic prevention principle that our country has always adhered to. 4
Be the first person responsible for your own health
Someone on the Internet asked:
Does the change in the current epidemic prevention strategy mean that the focus of our epidemic prevention has changed from "protecting people's lives and health" to "restoring the economy and ensuring production".
In fact, the two do not conflict, because the two are fundamentally closely related, the relationship between "fish" and "water".
Without people, the so-called economic recovery and production guarantee will be impossible.
From an economic perspective, population is the fundamental driving force for sustained economic development.
To give a very simple example, let’s say Foxconn .
If there is no one, who will resume work and production?
Without economic protection, people's life safety and health will lack strong support.
National epidemic prevention costs money, establishing a more complete health and medical system costs money, and individual medical treatment and medicine also cost money.
Therefore, the relationship between the two cannot be viewed in an opposite light.
Understanding this, we can better understand the internal logic of changes in national epidemic prevention policies.
In the past three years, we have adopted relatively strict epidemic prevention measures.
That's because in the past, viruses were more pathogenic, our epidemic prevention system was not yet sound, the popularity of the domestic vaccine still needs to be enhanced, and the clinical experience for infected people needs to be improved...
If we relax it early, the inevitable consequence will be more deaths.
Although we have made huge sacrifices in the past three years, we have achieved a lower mortality rate, which is undoubtedly beneficial in the long run.
Money can be made again, but people cannot be resurrected after death.
Therefore, whether it is considered from the "people-oriented" principle or from a cost perspective, these three years of hard work are worth it.
Now, why do we need to change the epidemic prevention strategy? That is because all conditions have matured.
The pathogenicity of the virus has been significantly reduced. Our country's epidemic prevention system is also relatively sound. The vaccination penetration rate among residents is also high. The clinical experience with infected people is also becoming increasingly rich...
The east wind has arrived, and it is no longer appropriate to stick to the past epidemic prevention model.
Taking Guangzhou as an example again, there have been more than 160,000 infections in this round of epidemic, but no one has died.
It is foreseeable that the price we pay for changing the epidemic prevention strategy at this time must be very small.
In this case, it is necessary to restore the economy, resume work and production, and protect employment.
Epidemic prevention is not for the sake of epidemic prevention. Essentially, it is to protect the interests of the people to the maximum extent.
Therefore, we must recognize the reality clearly, understand the internal logic of changes in national epidemic prevention policies, and believe that the country can make the most correct decision.
Of course, we must also clearly realize that the epidemic is far from over.
Changes in epidemic prevention strategies do not mean that we can let ourselves go.
On the contrary, we must be more strict with ourselves in the future.
This is a nationwide battle, and everyone must be the first person responsible for their own health.
Author introduction: "Mr. Kai's Thinking" is different from hot news information. It provides in-depth knowledge and analyzes the deeper reasons behind events to help you think more steadily in life and work. This article was first published on Volunteer Cloud Home (ID: zhiyuanyunzhijia).
Without these three years of strict prevention and control, India’s epidemic prevention results would be the answer.
You may say, how can India’s medical and health system compare with ours.
What about the United States? What about the UK? What about Germany?
Let’s not talk about Western countries, let’s talk about Japan. It is a developed country after all. It is the third largest economy in the world, and its per capita GDP is more than three times that of our country.
Since the epidemic was liberalized at the beginning of this year, more than 30,000 people have died in just over 10 months.
(Source: "Chaoyang News" based on official report statistics)
If this death ratio is followed, how many deaths will there be in our country can be roughly calculated.
Moreover, this is just a rigid calculation.
Our country has a large population and a vast territory, so management is undoubtedly much more difficult.
is like managing a small company with 10 people and managing a company with 100 people. The difficulty is very different.
Therefore, we must clearly understand the efforts made by the country over the years and the difficulty behind achieving such outstanding results.
Of course, this is also inseparable from the efforts and sacrifices made by each of us. 3
The change in epidemic prevention policy is extremely cautious
So, today, why do we have to change the epidemic prevention strategy again?
For a while, everyone must have felt that many places across the country are optimizing and adjusting epidemic prevention and control measures.
As of December 6, a total of 16 cities and 2 provinces in China have successively announced that citizens do not need to provide nucleic acid test certificates to enter some public places.
signal
is already obvious!
Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of Global Times , put it this way: The release of the "Ten New Articles" of sounded the decisive clarion call for China to get out of the haze of the new crown epidemic.
It is foreseeable that more places will respond in the coming days.
The old epidemic prevention model will gradually become a thing of the past, and a new epidemic prevention model is gradually taking shape.
Such a change has made many people feel a little panicked. Is it too hasty?
But we must realize that this change is definitely not the result of a sudden change. On the contrary, it is a scientific decision made based on an extremely cautious attitude and in compliance with the development situation of the epidemic.
From the end of 2019 to the end of 2022, many countries have gradually relaxed control, but we have been persisting and observing the evolution of the new coronavirus.
evolved from the original original strain to alpha, beta, gamma, then to delta , and then to today's Omicron .
We can see that the overall trend of virus evolution is that the pathogenicity is constantly weakening and the infectivity is rising.
basically conforms to Darwin's theory of evolution - the law of survival of the fittest.
The origin of the Omicron strain is still unknown, but the Omicron variant BA.1 was first discovered in Africa in November 2021.
and in just one or two months, quickly replaced delta virus and became the main new coronavirus variant in the world.
Compared with Delta virus, although Omicron is more contagious, its toxicity is significantly milder.
Therefore, starting from Omicron, " asymptomatic infected persons " became mainstream.
Based on this, more countries have chosen to relax control over the epidemic, and Japan is a typical example.
In the early days of the epidemic, Japan was also very strict in epidemic control, so it also achieved very good results.
However, in March this year, it was announced that the epidemic prevention and control measures would be completely lifted.
Japan, as one of the model students in Asia’s epidemic prevention, cannot be said to be not cautious enough in dealing with the epidemic.
But compared with it, we are undoubtedly more cautious.
Even in the face of the less pathogenic Omicron strain, we are still observing it with great caution.
We have been battling viruses for so many years. We all know that viruses mutate very quickly.
We cannot guarantee that the Omicron strain will not undergo another leapfrog evolution (that is, genetic recombination and evolution into a new virus).
We cannot guarantee whether this evolution will lead to a weaker or stronger pathogenicity.
So, we can only continue to observe.
We have been observing the Omicron virus for another year.
From the original Omicron BA.1, to BA.2, to BA.5 that is currently popular in various parts of the country, and now in Beijing, BF.7 (a sub-strain of the BA.5 variant), known as the most contagious, is raging.
It can be said that we already have a relatively comprehensive understanding of the Omikron virus.
On December 3 this year, at the 2022 Medical Virus Conference of the Chinese Medical Association, Zhang Wenhong made the latest research and judgment.
He said frankly: From the current point of view, although there are many subtypes of Omicron, its leapfrog evolution seems extremely difficult.
Moreover, the pathogenicity of and of the currently popular Omicron variant is within our acceptable range.
It can be seen from the seriousness rate of the Guangzhou epidemic:
In this round of the epidemic, Guangzhou has a cumulative infection of more than 160,000 cases, and there are only 4 severe cases, and they are all caused by underlying diseases.
author | curator Mr. Kai | author
source | Volunteer Cloud Home
(zhiyuanyunzhijia)
1
Seeing the interest demands behind the diverse opinions
In the face of the epidemic, different people, based on different positions, will have different voices.
Ass determines thinking, and interests drive concepts.
In the past few years during the epidemic, there have been two common voices in the public opinion field - "clearing" and "coexisting" .
Regarding these two voices, we cannot just say who is right and who is wrong.
Rather, we need to see the different interests and demands represented behind these two voices.
The adult world is never about emotions, but about considering costs and weighing the pros and cons.
To give a very realistic example:
Liu is my high school classmate. He worked in an Internet company after graduating from college.
In the first two years of the epidemic, he can be said to be a staunch "clearance fan."
At that time, he did not feel the threat to him from the epidemic. In fact, because he often "worked from home", he felt better than before the epidemic. Do you want to clear
? Do you want to support national policies? That must be necessary.
I can still get my salary, and it can also prevent the spread of virus and protect everyone's life and health. Of course, such a good policy that benefits the country and the people must be supported unswervingly.
But this year, the company overturned, and he was forced to lose his job. He planned to go out and find a new job. The frequent lockdowns made it difficult for him to move.
Without the source of income, the pressure of reality is coming.
Not to mention anything else, just the mortgage on his body was like a ghost that was trying to kill him, constantly spurring him on.
The bank will not open up to you just because you have lost your job or have been banned from home.
At this time, whether to clear it is no longer his main concern. He just wants to know when he can be released and he can quickly find a job to make a living.
This is the reality, it is very skinny, but it is a problem that we have to face squarely.
Not everyone’s job is to guarantee harvests despite droughts and floods.
The job is very stable and there is not much risk of unemployment. If it were me, I would prefer to stick to the clearing side.
My own freedom may be subject to some restrictions, but it is better than increasing the risk of infection, not to mention that there are elderly and children at home.
But because of the epidemic, those who have lost their jobs and have difficulty making ends meet have different attitudes.
In the short term, they may be able to survive, but in the long term, what can they do? They have to live.
If you have an elderly person at home, you need to support them, right? If you have children, it costs money to go to school, right? If you buy a house with a loan, you need to repay the mortgage, right? If you open a shop to do small business, do you need to pay rent...
These all cost money, and no one will pay for you.
When the snowflakes of the epidemic really fall on you, it will hurt.
Therefore, no matter which point of view it is, it is narrow-minded to use simple "right" and "wrong" to measure it.
Because behind these views, they often represent different interest groups and the thousands of families that make up this society.
They themselves have no malicious intentions. Who doesn’t hope that the epidemic will end soon, and who doesn’t hope that the country will be peaceful and the people will be safe?
Everyone’s expectations are actually the same. It’s just that different groups often have different interest demands based on their different actual situations.
We should realize the rationality of this social disparity.
In China, if we want to create a safer environment at the expense of personal freedom without affecting the livelihood of the people, I believe that the vast majority of people will not have any objections and will only complain a few times. How to block and control
, after all, safety is important. Even if you don't consider yourself, you will consider the elderly and children at home.
Unlike some Western countries, people feel uncomfortable if they don’t go out for a walk for a day. They are required to wear a mask and even ask their grandparents to advise them.
However, we all know that this assumption is unrealistic. It is impossible to want both
. There are bound to be many helpless choices in the middle.
Since it is a choice, you must weigh the pros and cons.
So, how does the country weigh it?
Why have we adopted relatively strict epidemic prevention measures in the past three years?
Now, why do we need to adjust and optimize and gradually relax control?
Only by understanding the logic behind these issues can we grasp the backbone of the current changes in epidemic prevention.
2 Three years of strict defense
December 1, 2019 ~ November 11, 2022.
In the past three years, from the outbreak of the new coronavirus in China to the introduction of the "Twenty" epidemic prevention optimization measures, our attitude towards the epidemic has basically been "prevent and defend", which is a three-year period of increasing epidemic prevention.
Why do we do this? Let’s look at a set of data first:
The United States has a population of 332 million and a total of more than 1.1 million deaths.
The United Kingdom has a population of 67.32 million and a total of about 197,000 deaths.
Germany has a population of 83.13 million and a total of about 158,000 deaths.
France, with a population of 67.5 million, currently has about 159,000 similar deaths.
Russia has a population of 143 million and a total of about 392,000 deaths.
Japan has a population of 126 million and a total of 50,608 deaths.
South Korea has a population of 51.74 million and a total of 30,847 deaths.
The population of these countries is much lower than that of China. However, India, which has the population closest to China, has published death data of more than 500,000.
But in fact, the number of deaths in India due to the epidemic is still a mystery.
Previously, the WHO had estimated that between 2020 and 2021, the number of deaths due to the new crown epidemic in India would be as high as 4.7 million.
Without these three years of strict prevention and control, India’s epidemic prevention results would be the answer.
You may say, how can India’s medical and health system compare with ours.
What about the United States? What about the UK? What about Germany?
Let’s not talk about Western countries, let’s talk about Japan. It is a developed country after all. It is the third largest economy in the world, and its per capita GDP is more than three times that of our country.
Since the epidemic was liberalized at the beginning of this year, more than 30,000 people have died in just over 10 months.
(Source: "Chaoyang News" based on official report statistics)
If this death ratio is followed, how many deaths will there be in our country can be roughly calculated.
Moreover, this is just a rigid calculation.
Our country has a large population and a vast territory, so management is undoubtedly much more difficult.
is like managing a small company with 10 people and managing a company with 100 people. The difficulty is very different.
Therefore, we must clearly understand the efforts made by the country over the years and the difficulty behind achieving such outstanding results.
Of course, this is also inseparable from the efforts and sacrifices made by each of us. 3
The change in epidemic prevention policy is extremely cautious
So, today, why do we have to change the epidemic prevention strategy again?
For a while, everyone must have felt that many places across the country are optimizing and adjusting epidemic prevention and control measures.
As of December 6, a total of 16 cities and 2 provinces in China have successively announced that citizens do not need to provide nucleic acid test certificates to enter some public places.
signal
is already obvious!
Hu Xijin, editor-in-chief of Global Times , put it this way: The release of the "Ten New Articles" of sounded the decisive clarion call for China to get out of the haze of the new crown epidemic.
It is foreseeable that more places will respond in the coming days.
The old epidemic prevention model will gradually become a thing of the past, and a new epidemic prevention model is gradually taking shape.
Such a change has made many people feel a little panicked. Is it too hasty?
But we must realize that this change is definitely not the result of a sudden change. On the contrary, it is a scientific decision made based on an extremely cautious attitude and in compliance with the development situation of the epidemic.
From the end of 2019 to the end of 2022, many countries have gradually relaxed control, but we have been persisting and observing the evolution of the new coronavirus.
evolved from the original original strain to alpha, beta, gamma, then to delta , and then to today's Omicron .
We can see that the overall trend of virus evolution is that the pathogenicity is constantly weakening and the infectivity is rising.
basically conforms to Darwin's theory of evolution - the law of survival of the fittest.
The origin of the Omicron strain is still unknown, but the Omicron variant BA.1 was first discovered in Africa in November 2021.
and in just one or two months, quickly replaced delta virus and became the main new coronavirus variant in the world.
Compared with Delta virus, although Omicron is more contagious, its toxicity is significantly milder.
Therefore, starting from Omicron, " asymptomatic infected persons " became mainstream.
Based on this, more countries have chosen to relax control over the epidemic, and Japan is a typical example.
In the early days of the epidemic, Japan was also very strict in epidemic control, so it also achieved very good results.
However, in March this year, it was announced that the epidemic prevention and control measures would be completely lifted.
Japan, as one of the model students in Asia’s epidemic prevention, cannot be said to be not cautious enough in dealing with the epidemic.
But compared with it, we are undoubtedly more cautious.
Even in the face of the less pathogenic Omicron strain, we are still observing it with great caution.
We have been battling viruses for so many years. We all know that viruses mutate very quickly.
We cannot guarantee that the Omicron strain will not undergo another leapfrog evolution (that is, genetic recombination and evolution into a new virus).
We cannot guarantee whether this evolution will lead to a weaker or stronger pathogenicity.
So, we can only continue to observe.
We have been observing the Omicron virus for another year.
From the original Omicron BA.1, to BA.2, to BA.5 that is currently popular in various parts of the country, and now in Beijing, BF.7 (a sub-strain of the BA.5 variant), known as the most contagious, is raging.
It can be said that we already have a relatively comprehensive understanding of the Omikron virus.
On December 3 this year, at the 2022 Medical Virus Conference of the Chinese Medical Association, Zhang Wenhong made the latest research and judgment.
He said frankly: From the current point of view, although there are many subtypes of Omicron, its leapfrog evolution seems extremely difficult.
Moreover, the pathogenicity of and of the currently popular Omicron variant is within our acceptable range.
It can be seen from the seriousness rate of the Guangzhou epidemic:
In this round of the epidemic, Guangzhou has a cumulative infection of more than 160,000 cases, and there are only 4 severe cases, and they are all caused by underlying diseases.
has also been explained in detail by relevant people who have experienced it.
For example, recently The Paper News interviewed many Shanghai residents who have turned negative. These include elderly people in their 90s, young people in their 20s and 30s, and children as young as 6 years old.
At present, their lives have returned to normal, and there are currently no sequelae.
What are their specific experiences? Due to the limited space of this article, we will not elaborate in detail. You can refer to the article (click to view).
Judging from the current number of new international deaths, there is an obvious trend of slowing down.
This exactly reflects the "people-oriented" epidemic prevention principle that our country has always adhered to. 4
Be the first person responsible for your own health
Someone on the Internet asked:
Does the change in the current epidemic prevention strategy mean that the focus of our epidemic prevention has changed from "protecting people's lives and health" to "restoring the economy and ensuring production".
In fact, the two do not conflict, because the two are fundamentally closely related, the relationship between "fish" and "water".
Without people, the so-called economic recovery and production guarantee will be impossible.
From an economic perspective, population is the fundamental driving force for sustained economic development.
To give a very simple example, let’s say Foxconn .
If there is no one, who will resume work and production?
Without economic protection, people's life safety and health will lack strong support.
National epidemic prevention costs money, establishing a more complete health and medical system costs money, and individual medical treatment and medicine also cost money.
Therefore, the relationship between the two cannot be viewed in an opposite light.
Understanding this, we can better understand the internal logic of changes in national epidemic prevention policies.
In the past three years, we have adopted relatively strict epidemic prevention measures.
That's because in the past, viruses were more pathogenic, our epidemic prevention system was not yet sound, the popularity of the domestic vaccine still needs to be enhanced, and the clinical experience for infected people needs to be improved...
If we relax it early, the inevitable consequence will be more deaths.
Although we have made huge sacrifices in the past three years, we have achieved a lower mortality rate, which is undoubtedly beneficial in the long run.
Money can be made again, but people cannot be resurrected after death.
Therefore, whether it is considered from the "people-oriented" principle or from a cost perspective, these three years of hard work are worth it.
Now, why do we need to change the epidemic prevention strategy? That is because all conditions have matured.
The pathogenicity of the virus has been significantly reduced. Our country's epidemic prevention system is also relatively sound. The vaccination penetration rate among residents is also high. The clinical experience with infected people is also becoming increasingly rich...
The east wind has arrived, and it is no longer appropriate to stick to the past epidemic prevention model.
Taking Guangzhou as an example again, there have been more than 160,000 infections in this round of epidemic, but no one has died.
It is foreseeable that the price we pay for changing the epidemic prevention strategy at this time must be very small.
In this case, it is necessary to restore the economy, resume work and production, and protect employment.
Epidemic prevention is not for the sake of epidemic prevention. Essentially, it is to protect the interests of the people to the maximum extent.
Therefore, we must recognize the reality clearly, understand the internal logic of changes in national epidemic prevention policies, and believe that the country can make the most correct decision.
Of course, we must also clearly realize that the epidemic is far from over.
Changes in epidemic prevention strategies do not mean that we can let ourselves go.
On the contrary, we must be more strict with ourselves in the future.
This is a nationwide battle, and everyone must be the first person responsible for their own health.
Author introduction: "Mr. Kai's Thinking" is different from hot news information. It provides in-depth knowledge and analyzes the deeper reasons behind events to help you think more steadily in life and work. This article was first published on Volunteer Cloud Home (ID: zhiyuanyunzhijia).
Taking Guangzhou as an example again, there have been more than 160,000 infections in this round of epidemic, but no one has died.
It is foreseeable that the price we pay for changing the epidemic prevention strategy at this time must be very small.
In this case, it is necessary to restore the economy, resume work and production, and protect employment.
Epidemic prevention is not for the sake of epidemic prevention. Essentially, it is to protect the interests of the people to the maximum extent.
Therefore, we must recognize the reality clearly, understand the internal logic of changes in national epidemic prevention policies, and believe that the country can make the most correct decision.
Of course, we must also clearly realize that the epidemic is far from over.
Changes in epidemic prevention strategies do not mean that we can let ourselves go.
On the contrary, we must be more strict with ourselves in the future.
This is a nationwide battle, and everyone must be the first person responsible for their own health.
Author introduction: "Mr. Kai's Thinking" is different from hot news information. It provides in-depth knowledge and analyzes the deeper reasons behind events to help you think more steadily in life and work. This article was first published on Volunteer Cloud Home (ID: zhiyuanyunzhijia).
