world

Empty shelves and anxiety as Shanghai COVID-19 cases surge

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2022 AFP

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

Well, China is experiencing Karma.

5 ( +12 / -7 )

Empty shelves in much of Europe as well.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Well, China is experiencing Karma.

It's not the general people's fault. They're the ones who'll ultimately suffer.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Normally I am very supportive of China's government, but feels like some missteps here.

The semi-lockdowns around Shanghai just reminds me of Japan's quasi-semi-lockdown dance that ultimately wasn't very effective at doing much of anything. They've had such a good record with actual lockdowns across the country, they could have done the same here.

Also the fact that emergency runs were being made on grocery stores seems telling of poor planning. Other regions of China underwent total lockdowns and had government support of food being delivered to residents to make sure that nobody went without.

I know that China absolutely can do better than this so definitely reason to be critical here.

-18 ( +1 / -19 )

Some couldn't buy anything at the supermarkets, while others over-shopped and posted online images/videos of all the food they bought.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Lockdowns are pretty ineffective, but luckily death rates from this surge in cases are likely to be way lower than in many other countries dur to Omicron taking over. So if you measure success by death rate then pretty good. cost to the country and its people less easy to measure and likely to be pretty substantial.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

I just watched a video of an old woman crying and pleading on the ground to let the hazmat guys to let her husband through so he could to get treatment for his cancer but they wouldn't let him.

I think this blanket lockdown is not well thought out and a lot of people are suffering due to it.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

All non essential businesses are now closed. Everyone has to stay home. Food will be brought and dropped off in an isolated spot where people can go to grab it, in order, to avoid contact with others and you have to show your papers to get it. Anyone who can work from home will work from home. All public transport is suspended.

They just locked down Shanghai claiming it was for a "zero covid policy". But you don't lock down Shanghai for that. Something is up that they don't want talked about.

THIS IS IN SHANGHAI, not Wuhan or some other less important city. These measures are more severe than anything issued in Shanghai yet.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

I can only understand what is going on in Shanghai in relation to what I have seen here where I live. During the latest Covid surge, although there were many breakthrough cases, the fully vaccinated, and especially those with booster shots, were unlikely to have to be hospitalized for illness. I hope the same holds true for Chinese cities. Is it true that the Chinese vaccines are not as good at preventing serious illness as those used elsewhere?

Some we know who live in Mexico had little choice but to get the Chinese vaccine, but they have been thinking about getting a Pfizer or Moderna booster when they can.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Lockdowns just don’t work against Omicron. Even in Australia, where the unarguable record of success of lockdowns against previous mutations of Covid continue to bother the bejesus out of the anti-lockdown crowd, we’ve dropped the lockdown option against Omicron and are learning to live with its high transmission rate but low fatalities. China has to accept that trying to combat Covid in this way will not work, and the costs are not worth it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The anxiety is just fueled by useless lockdowns decided by governments

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I can tell you the deliver services and supermarket business is booming during these kind of chaos. They can sell their stock quickly at a high price and you would even be willing to buy almost any product no matter the expire date. And after a few days when the lockdown get lifted, most hoarders get stuck with months of extra supplies in their houses.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

We ain't over this yet, folks.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Time for Shanghai to go back to the zero covid policy. This is the best method to limit infections and covid related deaths, which is why China had the lowest rates of each in the world when it adopted this strategy.

Otherwise, the high rates of infections and covid related deaths that Australia and New Zealand are experiencing since they moved away from the zero covid suppression strategy will hit China too.

Lock it down!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The anxiety is just fueled by useless lockdowns decided by governments

The anxiety comes from an easily transmissible disease that can cause death, lockdowns can be effective and sometimes necessary when the option is to cause unnecessary deaths and the benefits surpass the costs.

Time for Shanghai to go back to the zero covid policy

Shanghai as the rest of China has never been out of zero covid policy, this is the results of following something impossible to achieve in reality instead of a well fundamented strategy according to the scientific experts as New Zealand did, which allowed the country to abandon a risky and extremely innefficient strategy that the experts have condemned as such. Shanghai had no chance to enact more stringent measures without destroying the economy precisely because of this policy.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The article mentions cases, but no mention of hospitalizations or deaths.

They should let omicron spread while protecting the more vulnerable.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

They should let omicron spread while protecting the more vulnerable.

That is the thing, experts have expressed clearly that there is no realistically possible way to protect the vulnerable population while letting the infection spread without control. Even Omicron kills, and do it frequently in every place where it has spread. Recommending to ignore the specialists and sacrifice the vulnerable population is not something positive.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

virusrexToday  11:14 am JST

That is the thing, experts have expressed clearly that there is no realistically possible way to protect the vulnerable population while letting the infection spread without control. Even Omicron kills, and do it frequently in every place where it has spread. Recommending to ignore the specialists and sacrifice the vulnerable population is not something positive.

And the experts agree that a zero covid policy is the most effective strategy to limit covid infections and covid related deaths, which is why China has the lowest rates for both in the world.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

They should let omicron spread while protecting the more vulnerable.

Exactly!

Experts (uncaptured ones) have been saying from the start that strict lock downs do more harm than good. This is even more true today with Omicron. The focus should indeed be placed on protecting the vulnerable with vaccines, medicines, supplements, and isolation.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Raw BeerToday  11:55 am JST

Experts (uncaptured ones) have been saying from the start that strict lock downs do more harm than good.

Maybe some have. But what kind of harm? Inability to go drinking on the 5th floor in a commercial building somewhere?

Regardless of what anyone opines, factually, the zero covid policy resulted in fewer covid infection and fewer covid related deaths than where less stringent restrictions are used.

Isn't death the ultimate harm?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

And the experts agree that a zero covid policy is the most effective strategy to limit covid infections and covid related deaths

Since you have failed to produce even one that says so or that openly recommends the policy that can be safely disregarded as not true.

which is why China has the lowest rates for both in the world.

As proved before with evidence this is not true, other countries have lower rates, specially counting the situation of Hong Kong that is of course part of China for all purposes.

Experts (uncaptured ones) have been saying from the start that strict lock downs do more harm than good.

Pretending the experts of every single institution of the world are "captured" and that is why they do not support your personal belief is not credible, particular applications of any measure could be uneffective, but the measure itself has been proved, even scientifically to be effective in protecting lives.

The focus should indeed be placed on protecting the vulnerable with vaccines, medicines, supplements, and isolation.

Again, the experts have said repeatedly that rampant infection is not congruent with protecting vulnerable population, and it also causes healthy people to have serious health problems or die from the infection (yes, even Omicron), believing otherwise is not an argument. As scientists responded when the botched Great Barrington declaration was done this approach of just letting people get infected without any control is irresponsible, ascientific and unethical.

Regardless of what anyone opines, factually, the zero covid policy resulted in fewer covid infection and fewer covid related deaths than where less stringent restrictions are used.

Isn't death the ultimate harm?

The zero covid policy is not innocuous, and the waste of resources (because it could be replaced with a much more efficient policy to give equivalent results) also means people will die because those resources are drained from other needs in the health services. If you manage to save 100 people a day by letting other 20 die that is still much worse than saving 95 people without letting anybody die for it.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

virusrexToday  01:02 pm JST

Since you have failed to produce even one that says so or that openly recommends the policy that can be safely disregarded as not true.

Again, you continue to ignore the experts advice, scientific data, and facts in general.

As proved before with evidence this is not true, other countries have lower rates, specially counting the situation of Hong Kong that is of course part of China for all purposes.

Nope. The data proves it.

Regardless of what anyone opines, factually, the zero covid policy resulted in fewer covid infection and fewer covid related deaths than where less stringent restrictions are used.

Right.

The zero covid policy is not innocuous, and the waste of resources (because it could be replaced with a much more efficient policy to give equivalent results) also means people will die because those resources are drained from other needs in the health services. If you manage to save 100 people a day by letting other 20 die that is still much worse than saving 95 people without letting anybody die for it.

Ok, so just pull random numbers out of the air.

I see a pattern here.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Again, you continue to ignore the experts advice, scientific data, and facts in general.

It is difficult not to do it because you keep trying to argue from the complete lack of them, as long as you do not present those scientific data and "facts in general" the only logical response is to ignore them, after all they do not exist. You are still trying to prove Hong Kong is not China.

Nope. The data proves it

You have already accepted before that other countries do better than China, and that is even without the Hong Kong data, that makes this much easier.

Ok, so just pull random numbers out of the air.

Do you understand what an hypotetical example is? when people fail to understand an argument (that a policy can cause more deaths than what are necessary by better solutions) one way to make it easier to understand is to put numbers to it, if you are unable to disprove the logic of the argument (that do not depend on any specifici numbers but the comparison) that still means you are accepting your original idea is incorrect.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Isn't death the ultimate harm?

Yes, but you are only looking at "covid related deaths". Many were estimating that lockdowns would cause an increase in other deaths (suicides, diseases going untreated...).

And that was way before omicron. Omicron in no way warrants lockdowns...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yes, but you are only looking at "covid related deaths". Many were estimating that lockdowns would cause an increase in other deaths (suicides, diseases going untreated...).

And that was way before omicron. Omicron in no way warrants lockdowns...

Lockdowns used rationally and under scientifically justified conditions do prevent much more deaths than what they can produce directly or indirectly, this is part of the decision.

And again, Omicron can cause very important number of deaths, so a country where cases are expanding uncontrollably can be justified in enacting lockdowns to give them time to control the spreading by other means. This can happen for example in countries where poor vaccination rates leave their population vulnerable to complications and deaths by Omicron (that produce them in much higher rates than vaccines even in otherwise healthy people).

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

And again, Omicron can cause very important number of deaths

Yeah, so important that articles almost never mention the deaths; focusing instead on "cases"

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Yeah, so important that articles almost never mention the deaths; focusing instead on "cases"

That does nothingto negate the uncountable deaths it has caused in every country it has affected, disregarding those lives as uninportant only makes it clear you have no interest in public health and instead just oppose science even if this can mislead others into taking unnecessary risks.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites