美國(guó)的城市會(huì)成為下一個(gè)武漢么?

“如果幸運(yùn)的話或許可以。”

近日，《衛(wèi)報(bào)》刊發(fā)美國(guó)兩位科學(xué)家——蕾妮·C·沃思博（Renee C Wurth）與尼克·歐布拉多維奇（Nick Obradovich）的聯(lián)合署名文章。文章中，《衛(wèi)報(bào)》編輯大寫加粗標(biāo)出了這樣一句話：學(xué)習(xí)武漢經(jīng)驗(yàn)是我們防止國(guó)家陷入歷史性災(zāi)難的唯一辦法。

 

 

開(kāi)篇，兩位作者旗幟鮮明地亮出了自己的觀點(diǎn)：現(xiàn)如今，一個(gè)選擇題擺在我們面前。我們可以學(xué)習(xí)武漢近期的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，學(xué)習(xí)中國(guó)應(yīng)對(duì)冠狀病毒的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。或者我們重蹈覆轍，重演1918年大流感的悲劇。

If we don't learn from history, we're doomed to repeat it. 
Today we have a choice. We can learn from the recent past – from the experience of Wuhan, China's fight against the coronavirus – or we can repeat the distant past, ending up with a pandemic reminiscent of the 1918 Spanish flu.

文章認(rèn)為，美國(guó)的處境很危險(xiǎn)，唯有像中國(guó)一樣迅速采取措施，少玩一些華而不實(shí)的政治游戲才能自救。

盡管目前武漢新冠病毒確診病例數(shù)最多，但如果我們美國(guó)沿著現(xiàn)在的道路繼續(xù)向前，在應(yīng)對(duì)大流感的過(guò)程中，蓄意不設(shè)防、 做一些徒有其表的攀比、搞政治活動(dòng)、猶豫不決、治理無(wú)能，那么我們只有最幸運(yùn)的城市才能跟武漢有可比性。

 

迅速?gòu)奈錆h經(jīng)驗(yàn)中學(xué)習(xí)，是阻止我們國(guó)家陷入歷史性災(zāi)難的唯一途徑。

 

Though Wuhan has had the most cases of the coronavirus so far, if we continue much further along our national path of purposeful unpreparedness, specious comparisons, politicking, hesitation and ineptitude in our response to the pandemic, only our most lucky cities will be comparable to Wuhan.

 

Learning from Wuhan's recent past – and rapidly acting on those lessons – is the only way we can prevent our nation from driving itself into a historic catastrophe.

為何中國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)是行之有效的？

文中的兩位筆者先進(jìn)行了數(shù)據(jù)分析。

武漢有1100萬(wàn)人，累積確診病例有6.7萬(wàn)，占總?cè)丝诘?.6%。盡管在疫情期間獲得準(zhǔn)確的數(shù)據(jù)很難，但經(jīng)世界衛(wèi)生組織(WHO)的實(shí)地考察報(bào)告證實(shí)，該市的數(shù)據(jù)是可信的。

In a city of nearly 11 million, Wuhan's approximately 67,000 cases amount to just 0.6% of its population. And despite the difficulty of obtaining accurate data amid the crisis, the World Health Organization (WHO)ground reports verify the numbers coming out of the city as credible. Given the (relatively high) estimated rates of transmissibility of this virus, how did Chinese officials in Wuhan keep it from spreading more rapidly?

這種病毒的傳播率相對(duì)較高，中國(guó)官員是如何阻止它進(jìn)一步快速傳播的呢?兩位筆者進(jìn)行了深入的分析。在最早期階段，武漢地方政府應(yīng)行動(dòng)遲緩，導(dǎo)致病毒未能有效控制給現(xiàn)代醫(yī)療造成很大壓力。從武漢考察后，世界衛(wèi)生組織的官員得出結(jié)論：這種病毒可以無(wú)癥狀傳播，使其傳播率最大化。

但當(dāng)如狼似虎的病毒要蔓延到中國(guó)其它城市時(shí)，中國(guó)政府采取了嚴(yán)密的社會(huì)隔離措施，與此同時(shí)，免費(fèi)提供病毒檢測(cè)，試圖減緩病毒傳播。

As soon as it was clear that the virus was swamping healthcare in Wuhan and threatening to engulf China more broadly, the Chinese government implemented radical social distancing measures, coupled with abundant free testing, attempting to slow the virus's spread.

為控制疫情，1月23日，武漢宣布關(guān)閉所有離漢通道。

對(duì)外交通停運(yùn)，停止公共交通和駕駛，強(qiáng)制戴口罩，取消社交聚會(huì)，要求居家隔離——這些隨即被證明不足以阻止病毒的蔓延。

Yet, even these social distancing measures – stopping outbound transportation, stalling public transit and driving, implementing mandatory mask-wearing, cancelling social gatherings, and requiring home quarantines – proved insufficient to halt the expansion of the virus.

后來(lái)，中國(guó)政府進(jìn)一步采取了大膽的措施。

文章稱，2月1日，武漢轉(zhuǎn)為了集中隔離。這一舉措至關(guān)重要，事后被證明有效阻止了病毒向一小部分群體繼續(xù)擴(kuò)散。

Then, on 1 February, Wuhan switched to centralized quarantine, a decision that research has shown was essential in containing the spread of the virus to such a small portion of the city's population.

作者認(rèn)為，原本事態(tài)會(huì)非常惡劣。中國(guó)官員當(dāng)時(shí)的果斷行動(dòng)，挽救了數(shù)萬(wàn)人的生命。這座城市的封鎖政策為世界其它地區(qū)戰(zhàn)勝病毒提供了寶貴的信息和時(shí)間。

Still, it could have been much, much worse. Chinese officials saved tens of thousands of lives by acting as decisively as they did, when they did. And the city's path to containment has provided invaluable information and time for the rest of the world to get ahead of the virus.

 

 

△無(wú)干預(yù)狀態(tài)下，病情傳播曲線陡然升高；而圍堵干預(yù)策略下，曲線平穩(wěn)走低。

中國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)對(duì)美國(guó)的指導(dǎo)意義是什么？

在美國(guó)，我們否認(rèn)、淡化、拖延。沒(méi)有實(shí)質(zhì)性的跡象可以表明，美國(guó)愿意采取根本措施來(lái)減緩病毒的傳播。

In the US, we're following...strategy of deny, downplay and delay without substantial indication that we'll be willing to take the radical measures necessary to slow the spread of the virus.

不作為的每一天都增加了我們的醫(yī)療系統(tǒng)被這種長(zhǎng)期疾病壓垮的可能性。如果我們現(xiàn)在不行動(dòng)，我們很快就會(huì)問(wèn)：誰(shuí)的命更值錢？美國(guó)大多數(shù)人都處于危險(xiǎn)之中，我們沒(méi)有時(shí)間可以浪費(fèi)。

Each day of inaction increases the probability our healthcare systems become overwhelmed by the long-lasting sickness. If we don't act now, we'll soon be asking: whose life is worth more? With the majority of the nation at risk, we have no time to waste.

社會(huì)、公民和政府是時(shí)候統(tǒng)一行動(dòng)了——包括在所有“社區(qū)傳播”地區(qū)立即和強(qiáng)制性實(shí)行社會(huì)隔離，配套建立一些大規(guī)模的隔離區(qū)�，F(xiàn)在是時(shí)候?qū)W習(xí)武漢經(jīng)驗(yàn)了。

Now is the time for unified dramatic social, civic and governmental action – including immediate and mandatory social distancing in all areas with demonstrated community spread coupled with mass-scale quarantines. It's time to follow the good part of the Wuhan playbook.

中國(guó)把對(duì)抗病毒比作戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，動(dòng)員全民抗疫。這是恰當(dāng)?shù)�。否則，我們進(jìn)一步逃避的代價(jià)將是，數(shù)十萬(wàn)我們所愛(ài)之人的死亡。

China used the analogy to war to mobilize its people's response to the virus. It's apt. The cost of further avoidance will be measured in the hundreds of thousands of ugly deaths of our loved ones.

我們沒(méi)有人真正目睹過(guò)1918年的悲劇，我們可以想象中國(guó)政府如果沒(méi)有在武漢采取行動(dòng)，會(huì)發(fā)生多么可怕的事情。幾個(gè)月前，我們都目睹了這場(chǎng)危機(jī)的開(kāi)始，我們擔(dān)心我們中的許多城市可能會(huì)像武漢一樣糟糕。

Very few of us were alive to see the devastation of 1918, and we can only imagine the horrors of what could have happened had Wuhan not acted as they did. As we both watched this crisis start to unfold months ago, we worried that we might be on course for many of US cities to be as bad as Wuhan.

今天，我們意識(shí)到了：如果能成為武漢，我們將是幸運(yùn)的。

Today we realize: we would be lucky to be Wuhan.

如果一個(gè)多月前，西方愿意認(rèn)真研究中國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)，并采取行動(dòng)，結(jié)果會(huì)是怎樣？

《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》：
中國(guó)為西方國(guó)家贏取了時(shí)間
而他們卻白白浪費(fèi)了

一個(gè)月前，一些人在干什么？
一個(gè)月前，世界衛(wèi)生組織點(diǎn)名表?yè)P(yáng)中國(guó)，認(rèn)為中國(guó)采取行動(dòng)時(shí)勇敢、靈活、迅速。西方媒體直接挑釁發(fā)問(wèn)稱：“中國(guó)是否向世衛(wèi)組織施壓，要求你們表?yè)P(yáng)中國(guó)？”
一個(gè)多月前，西方主流媒體《華爾街日?qǐng)?bào)》忙著刊發(fā)文章，詆毀中國(guó)政府和中國(guó)人民抗擊疫情的努力，并寫上了《中國(guó)是真正的“亞洲病夫”》這種帶有種族歧視色彩的聳人聽(tīng)聞標(biāo)題。

疫情爆發(fā)后，西方以隔岸觀火的心態(tài)看中國(guó)，認(rèn)為遠(yuǎn)火與自己無(wú)關(guān)。

“當(dāng)時(shí)中國(guó)是在全力抗擊一個(gè)突如其來(lái)的可怕病毒，而西方國(guó)家提前幾周就已經(jīng)收到警告了。”

...while China had to contend with a nasty, sudden surprise, governments in the West have been on notice for weeks.

3月13日，《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》發(fā)布一篇評(píng)論員文章問(wèn)：為什么這么多國(guó)家在過(guò)去數(shù)周時(shí)間眼睜睜地看著疫情蔓延，好像和他們沒(méi)關(guān)系似的？

 

《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》評(píng)論員寫道，他的經(jīng)歷和事實(shí)都表明，西方國(guó)家無(wú)視了中國(guó)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn)，失去了抗擊疫情的最佳時(shí)機(jī)。

The attitude toward the coronavirus outbreak in the United States and much of Europe has been bizarrely reactive, if not outright passive — or that the governments in those regions have let pass their best chance to contain the virus's spread.

在全球疫情的危機(jī)時(shí)刻
中國(guó)選擇了毫無(wú)保留

北京時(shí)間12日凌晨，世界衛(wèi)生組織宣布：新冠肺炎疫情的爆發(fā)已經(jīng)構(gòu)成一次全球性“大流行”。這意味著疫情波及范圍已相當(dāng)廣泛。12日下午3點(diǎn)，中國(guó)開(kāi)了一次特殊的跨國(guó)會(huì)議，兩個(gè)小時(shí)的會(huì)議中，話題事無(wú)巨細(xì)，分享中國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)。

在全球疫情的危機(jī)時(shí)刻，中國(guó)選擇了毫無(wú)保留，中國(guó)急世界之所急。
如今，全球需要的是并肩作戰(zhàn)，敵人是病毒。希望西方部分媒體少些偏見(jiàn)，多一些互鑒。