By Izzy Tice
In understanding the initial outbreak in Wuhan, it is important to understand the timeline of the emergence of COVID-19, and the length of time in between steps taken by local, region, national, and international government organizations in reaction in the early stages of the pandemic
December 10: one of the earliest known patients falls ill; virus is not yet known though
December 26: local virologists first discover unknown virus’ striking similarity to SARS
December 27: local Wuhan health officials and hospitals first alerted by lab
December 31: Wuhan Municipal Health Commission alerts city residents of pneumonia outbreak
WHO China Country Office first informed of pneumonia outbreak; WHO, NHC, and China CDC quietly announce news of virus to rest of world
Word spreads on global media, but true scale of the virus is not known or understood yet
January 1: Seafood market is ordered to close by local authorities
January 3: National Institute of Viral Disease Control and Prevention first identifies complete genome of 2019-nCoV
January 23: Wuhan and three surrounding cities are finally locked down, but millions leave the areas without first being tested
January 30: WHO declares 2019-nCoV a global emergency
In this video from the South China Morning Post from early January, it is clear how early news of the virus was met with skepticism, as a local resident of Wuhan states that he doesn't "feel nervous at all". At this point, there were only 44 known cases, and the video states that authorities denied any possible human-to-human transmission, which we now know is completely wrong.
Rumors first circulated in late December by doctors and researchers who disseminated information about the virus on social media apps like WeChat and Weibo. On the days leading to the Lunar New Year, the Wuhan Public Security Bureau began to actually detain those “spreading rumors” about the unknown virus. Quoting the President of the PRC, Xi Jinping, state-owned news organizations encouraged Chinese internet users to “jointly build a harmonious, clear and bright cyberspace,” demonstrating clear government efforts to contain news and press about the virus.
Since then, many earlier whistleblowers and witnesses of the virus, like those quoted above, have gone on to speak out about the inadequacy of the local and state government's early steps, and how a lack of transparency with Chinese residents had a clear impact on the virus' spread and public understanding. Doctors and victims to the virus have expressed that earlier action and transparency would have mitigated and prevented the geographical spread of the virus, as residents would have been able to self-contain much sooner than when lockdown measures were implemented.
As shown here, several media outlets outside of China were quick to report the news of an unknown pneumonia outbreak in Wuhan as soon as news of it broke in late December. All three of these news articles covered what little information they had, many speculating what the virus was. Many thought it was linked to SARS, with which China had dealt with extensively in the early 2000s, but little was truly known. In fact, all three of the articles below claim the virus may be tied to SARS, which was later found out to be somewhat true, as the viruses are in the same family. It would not be another three weeks until the city was officially put on lockdown, providing ample time for travel in and out of the region, further spreading the virus outside of the Hubei province.
As time progresses, more evidence is released showing that Chinese authorities and health officials did not act quickly enough in informing the general public about this virus. In efforts to “maintain appearances”, public events were still held for weeks, and large gatherings within the epicenter of the outbreak were not prohibited until nearly a month after the initial outbreak. Many of the actions of the Chinese state did not truly allow for public understanding of the scale and severity of the virus; earlier information would no doubt have had a positive impact on the geographic spread of corona, preventing residents from intrastate and interstate travel.
One of the most significant factors involved in the geography of this initial spread is the continued travel in and around China, and additionally, out of China. Had local, regional, and state organizations themselves alerted the public sooner, as well as implemented lockdown procedures and measures, the spread of the virus would have been much more limited and contained. Now, Wuhan is emerging from the lockdown, and once public transportation had reopened in early April, hundreds of thousands of trips had already been made in the course of one week. This raises an important concern regarding transportation in the age of a globalized society where pandemics can occur so quickly; if the government had shut down transportation weeks earlier, thousands of cases could have most likely been prevented.
One interesting geographical side note is that NO2 (nitrogen dioxide) levels, which correlate with air quality and pollution, decreased by 63% after travel restrictions were put in place in Wuhan, demonstrating the global impact that development, industry, and transportation have on emissions. Optimistically, this entire situation could actually pave the way for environmental reform on pollution.