Advertisement
Advertisement
Coronavirus China
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
Residents queue at a Covid-19 testing booth in Beijing on July 27. China is sticking to its “dynamic zero-Covid” strategy of lockdowns, movement restrictions and mass testing. Photo: Bloomberg

Letters | China sticking with ‘dynamic zero-Covid’ strategy because it’s best for the country

  • Readers discuss China’s choice to stick with its ‘zero-Covid’ strategy, quarantine rules in Hong Kong and Novak Djokovic’s obligations as a role model
Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.

My heart goes out to those people who have been inconvenienced by China’s “dynamic zero-Covid” strategy.

However, China cannot afford to ignore the scientific protocol for the control of infectious diseases considering the expenses on healthcare for a population of 1.4 billion people and the huge financial losses it would incur if Covid-19 is allowed to spread freely.

Covid-19 is a new virus that will take time to analyse if we hope to contain or possibly eradicate it. Immunisation, isolating the infected, quarantining close contacts, wearing masks in public places, observing personal hygiene at all times and keeping a safe distance between people are the fundamental rules for controlling infections.

Granted, untrained officials who do not have the will or the ability to follow orders to oversee the preventive process properly can cause resentment among the public.

Sadly, Western countries, driven by a powerful moneymaking engine and the political government, adopted the strategy of living with the virus at too early a stage. Under this strategy, the virus can easily have a large number of hosts for it to keep mutating from one variant to another, causing high numbers of deaths and infections.

05:06

Explainer: How China’s Covid-19 health code system works

Explainer: How China’s Covid-19 health code system works
Some conspiracy theorists see a government ploy to encourage attrition of the old and vulnerable so as to save money on public healthcare. If that is true, they should know the savings will be temporary. Down the road, the medical treatment costs for the long Covid will be enormous.

With most parts of the world bogged down by the virus and China seemingly the only major country trying to eradicate Covid-19, the aim of global eradication looks unachievable. However, there is a chance China will ease off its zero-Covid strategy when its immunisation rate is near 100 per cent and the virus eventually mutates to a mild variant like that of the seasonal flu.

Chan Lau Charm Ming, North Point

Quarantine makes sense only in a Covid-free society

In Hong Kong, we are living in a bizarre situation created by leaders not following the right advice. Here, a few thousand people are getting infected with Covid-19 every day for the past weeks and many of these patients are allowed to recover at home.
On the other hand, there is another group of people who arrive from abroad, tested negative before they boarded their flight and test negative once again after they land in Hong Kong. These people are whisked away to a quarantine hotel for a week. Are such people with no visible disease and negative tests a greater risk to the society than the former group who are positive yet allowed to recover and quarantine at home?

Can someone please explain? Are we not incarcerating healthy, Covid-negative people in a hotel and letting other people with the disease stay at home?

Common sense says that institutional or hotel quarantine should be done in a community which is relatively free of the disease. There is no sense in this endless debate whether hotel quarantine should be reduced to five days or four or three. It should be entirely scrapped. Instead, the government should focus on vaccination and treatment.

Sutinder Bindra, Discovery Bay

Djokovic’s actions fall short as role model

In today’s world, the line that distinguishes between a role model and an idol has been heavily blurred. The former refers to an individual whose actions and behaviour are emulated by others. The latter is adored blindly and unconditionally.

In this regard, Novak Djokovic, one of the world’s top tennis players, has been in the spotlight for flaunting vaccine-free mantras and refusing to get vaccinated against Covid-19 to attend Wimbledon and the US Open (“Petition demanding Novak Djokovic be allowed to play in US Open despite anti-vax beliefs nears 12,000 signatures”, July 20). Many fans are questioning whether his actions are justifiable.
Djokovic made false declarations at the Australian border in January and visited a sports academy for young people and attended an interview last December despite being Covid-positive.

I have idolised him since my younger years, but knowing this I admit I no longer wish to do so. He should not be above the law, and the authorities were right to bar him from setting foot on Australian soil. Regardless of bagging major titles, he should not treat someone’s life as a sport and, above all, not act out of ego.

I am in no position to lecture others if they perceive their idols as godlike figures. However, idolising can be a harmful obsession as millions of fans follow their idols on and off the pitch. Their good and bad traits are being picked on. Hence, the least our idols can do is project an image that we can all look up to and relate to as role models.

Abas Khan, Mong Kok

8