Wuhan coronavirus: Did Chinese officials downplay the extent of deadly outbreak in its early stages?
Some reports now suggest that China may have underplayed the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak in its early stages even as the death toll in the country has hit 132 from Friday's estimate of 26.
The number of reported Wuhan coronavirus cases has also picked up pace— from over 800 on Friday to over 5,900 on January 29.
What is more, the initial data provided by the Chinese authorities may not have been accurate, as a Lancet study authored by Chinese scientists and doctors suggests that people developed the infection a few weeks earlier than claimed by the Chinese officials.
In the last one week, the Wuhan coronavirus cases have snowballed, with its severity coming to light only after January 19. This could be attributed to investigations carried out by a medical team dispatched by China's National Health Commission.
Was there a cover-up earlier?
The Wuhan heath commission reported no new cases between January 5 and 10 and again between January 12 and 16. If reports are to be believed, the Wuhan health commission officials allegedly told doctors that they were not allowed to report about the new virus, letting patients wander around freely instead of being isolated.
And when people spoke up about the mysterious pneumonia-causing infection, they were arrested: the Wuhan police said they had arrested eight people for spreading "rumors" about the virus. And Chinese authorities detained and threatened to arrest journalists reporting the outbreak.
“Wuhan authorities clearly downplayed or made efforts to hide the situation for an extended period of time,” Dali Yang, a professor of Chinese politics at the University of Chicago, told Associated Press. “It turned out to be one of the worst decisions that they'll regret all their lives,” said Yang.
According to the Lancet study, the first Wuhan coronavirus patient fell sick on December 1. But as per the Chinese officials, the infection did not arise until two weeks later.
China confirmed person-to-person transmission only on January 20. The Lancet report, on the other hand, found evidence of such transmission as early as January 2.
“The fact that the Lancet report is different from the official early Chinese account does raise enormous concerns around the truthfulness of information coming out of China,” Steven Hoffman, director of the Global Strategy Lab and a global health professor at York University, told Vox.
“If China did intentionally withhold information, that would not only be bad for public health but also illegal under international law. It would be a violation of the International Health Regulations, a legally binding treaty that covers how 195 countries respond to outbreaks like this one," he added.
The reasons behind the discrepancies?
These discrepancies could be due to several reasons. Vox reported that Wuhan authorities might not have had enough information to paint an accurate picture of the virus.
Also, China’s bureaucracy might be a factor: it may have slowed down the passing of information. This meant, the system prevented the lower-ranking officials from reporting information, especially politically sensitive information.
“There are a lot of internal processes that need to go through the bureaucracy in China to get official statements” from the central government, explained Alexandra Phelan, a member of the Center for Global Health Science and Security at Georgetown University who has lived and worked in China over the past two decades. “That rigidity means information may come out very, very slowly,” said Phelan.
Wuhan's Mayor Zhou Xianwang attested to this recently. “In local governance, after I receive information, I can only release it when I am authorized,” he said during a media briefing on Sunday.
He admitted that the outbreak was poorly managed initially, adding that the speed at which information was shared with the public was “not good enough”. Xianyang told China Central Television, during an interview, he said, "We locked down the city to cut the spread of the virus, but it is likely we will leave a bad reputation in history.”