[Barrin92]

because a lockdown doesn't necessarily slow down the spread by much (some epidemiologists suggested the Chinese lockdown only slowed the virus by 20% or so) while it has drastic effects on supply chains and the economy in the country. The trade-off is probably not worth it.

I can also be plain counterproductive by making people suspicious of authorities, with the result of sick people avoiding registering their infections or seeking help.

[pbourke]

Source for that 20%? WHO seems pretty convinced that the world should look to China as an example.

[roywiggins]

WHO has also taken a lot of criticism in recent days as being extremely solicitous towards China and avoiding anything that looks like criticising them.

That doesn't mean they're wrong, mind you. Just that, if they wanted to keep on the good side of Xi, perhaps they'd exaggerate how good his policies have been.

[jacquesm]

A 20% slowdown would be pretty major when taken to its conclusion. The graphs of 'China vs the world' tell that story in a way that not much else can:

https://ncov.r6.no/

Assuming the Chinese figures are accurate, according to the WHO delegation that just visited China and toured 5 cities in Hubei province they are.