The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown • Hacker News Board

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#81

Post by QuikAccount » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:06 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #69

QuikAccount wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not taking a side on whether or not deaths could've been averted but I would be very skeptical of data coming out of China.

So the argument is that the lockdown secretly failed, but we somehow missed in all antibody tests from travelers in China the widespread covid infection and we also missed all the 3 million deaths? Data from China is how we even got the sequence for the virus in the first place.

You are taking an extreme "trust everything or trust nothing" position that I didn't make. I'm saying China has in the past spread misinformation about covid even denying that it even existed when in the first place. People should be skeptical about data from China regarding the situation. I'm not saying disregard it just give it extra consideration before accepting it as gospel.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#82

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:06 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #60

godelski wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. There's also a lot of differences, like SARS didn't escape to be a global pandemic. I'd say that's a big difference. At this point zero covid is like trying to create a zero flu policy. That's very different from a zero measles policy.

Why? It's worked for them for a few years now and they have successfully mitigated what would have been millions of deaths. Your claim that it doesn't work because of the "nature of viruses" seems belied by the facts on the ground.

[deleted]

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#83

Post by dictateawayyyee » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:06 PM UTC

memish wrote: post #15

Why are they still pursuing Zero Covid? I know the article includes some speculation on this, but what's the best explanation?

Probably the same 3 reasons that seem to drive most authoritarian stay-the-course decisions:

* Can't admit the original plan isn't working without appearing weak.

* Operating on information corrupted by "compounding optimism" from every level of subordinates.

* Repercussions for bad outcomes are unlikely.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#84

Post by qiskit » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:06 PM UTC

dougmwne wrote: post #21

jaqalopes wrote: post #8

I lived in Shanghai for 5 years and have many friends and business connects there. I would never, ever want to be seen as carrying water for the CCP--the day they abolished term limits for Xi was the day I started planning my exit. I've been following this situation for almost a month now and in one sense it's every bit as bad as it looks. An inadequate and inhumane policy being enforced by an out of touch, or perhap…

Thank you for your take on this. My reaction is that you are of course right that this is not affecting everyone equally. Certainly the CCP is not starving out all 26 million people in Shanghai. But I think this is the exact fear most of us have of authoritarian governments, that minority voices get silenced or worse and that justice is not equally distributed.

> But I think this is the exact fear most of us have of authoritarian governments, that minority voices get silenced or worse and that justice is not equally distributed.

How is that an authoritarian government problem? You do realize that minority voices get silenced in every government and justice is nowhere equally distributed. Unless you are asserting the US, Canada, Australia, etc are/were authoritarian governments. The mindless propaganda when it comes to china is laughable.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#85

Post by ahmedalsudani » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:08 PM UTC

martinald wrote: post #62

ahmedalsudani wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- lower natural immunity rates because zero COVID had been successful - lower vaccination rates - vaccine drives prioritized the young and healthy (the idea being they can handle side effects so this seemed like the best way to achieve herd immunity) - the newer strains are super infectious and would overwhelm the healthcare system They don't have a good way out now. They should have used the time they got last year…

I think the other thing is China has somewhat demonised the rest of the world for is covid response, and it seems there was a lot of 'pride' at the fact the CCP had kept it at bay. Sort of "only the Chinese governmental system can save you", which for many months/years seemed true, with most of the rest of the world struggling to cope, wheras China was completely normal for a long time. It's clear this is going to en…

Yeah it does look like their initial success has set them up for a much bigger shock with Omicron. It's so much more infectious and is actually still rather severe. Most of us here have been vaccinated and/or have some natural immunity from prior waves, which made Omicron seem mild.

China seems to have a perfect storm of a healthcare system already stretched thin, low immunity among the population, and a super infectious strain.

The lockdowns are probably their best option but they also need to ramp up mRNA vaccinations in tandem. Zero COVID is unsustainable.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#86

Post by ceejayoz » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:08 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #33

somewhereoutth wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would also be very difficult to cover up the scale of sickness / death if COVID had run as as it has elsewhere.

I don't really trust China's numbers, but I'll agree that they've been much better than the US'. That said, while the Zero COVID policy was generally good and successful until recently, it no longer appears to be working, and efforts to continue it are increasingly harmful. If they're using the time to rapidly address their bafflingly low vaccination rates, then maybe it will prove worthwhile, but otherwise I don't s…

Mandating vaccination and getting it to 100% would probably reveal their own vaccine isn’t as good as the mRNA ones at preventing hospitalization and death.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#87

Post by cryptonector » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:08 PM UTC

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #14

jaqalopes wrote: post #8

I lived in Shanghai for 5 years and have many friends and business connects there. I would never, ever want to be seen as carrying water for the CCP--the day they abolished term limits for Xi was the day I started planning my exit. I've been following this situation for almost a month now and in one sense it's every bit as bad as it looks. An inadequate and inhumane policy being enforced by an out of touch, or perhap…

> But on the other hand, my friends who are quarantined and didn't get it are just bored to death, drinking and gaming and working from home, just treading water until this "ends." From what I've been hearing, the big problem for lots of people stuck under lockdown is simply getting groceries/food deliveries at all. The government isn't letting delivery people work, and the military response to distributing food isn'…

I wonder if there were many preppers in Shanghai.

I wonder if how many new preppers there are now throughout China.

Of all the reasons people prep, "long lockdowns" was never one until very recent times.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#88

Post by JumpCrisscross » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:09 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #11

partido3619463 wrote: post #2

Given the other stories posted on this site (universally claiming lockdowns were pointless and no medical reason for them), makes me question whether these stories are representative.

Plenty of studies showed lockdowns worked. The long term impact on COVID in vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations has eroded how deadly people perceive COVID. Estimates vary especially around secondary effects like hospitals being overcrowded, but cumulatively lockdowns in the US saved in the low millions of lives. “The study found that from March through August 2020, implementing widespread lockdowns and other miti…

I don’t think anyone questions the effectiveness when we literally didn’t know how Covid spread or how to treat it and our hospitals were getting overwhelmed.

The question is if they’re a useful endgame tool, after we have testing and treatments and vaccines. Absent the authoritarian measures China is deploying, the answer appears to be no: enough people skirt the rules to permit community spread.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#89

Post by seanmcdirmid » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:10 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #69

QuikAccount wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not taking a side on whether or not deaths could've been averted but I would be very skeptical of data coming out of China.

So the argument is that the lockdown secretly failed, but we somehow missed in all antibody tests from travelers in China the widespread covid infection and we also missed all the 3 million deaths? Data from China is how we even got the sequence for the virus in the first place.

Chinese local authorities will lose their jobs if they report any COVID deaths to the central government, so they don't report any (and why the central government was slow to be notified of the first Wuhan COVID cases in the first place). It isn't very complicated, that's how an authoritarian government works. They might actually be doing a good job, but the net effect to those of us on the outside is the same as if they were doing a bad job.

Re: The silenced deaths of the Shanghai 2022 lockdown

#90

Post by jtc331 » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 10:10 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #71

batch12 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it has worked until they have zero covid. Maybe a silver lining from this will be people resisting anything happening they perceive as mistreatment from their government.

Okay, I think that avoiding 3 million deaths might be worthy of some level of praise but agree to disagree :)

You are assuming their reported death numbers are accurate. You are also assuming the deaths caused by these policies won’t end up exceeding that number.

Neither assumptions are backed by evidence.