Changchun positive riders evaded nucleic acid detection and sent more than 100 materials. What impact did he bring to the local epidemic prevention and control?

According to news reports, during the epidemic prevention and control period, Guo, a courier rider in Changchun, violated the static management regulations and evaded the nucleic acid detection of all employees. He repeatedly left the residential area by drilling fences for take-away delivery service, and delivered more than 100 single materials in Chaoyang, Nanguan, Kuancheng and Erdao urban areas of Changchun City. Guo himself was subsequently tested positive for nucleic acid.

So, what impact did his behavior have on local epidemic prevention and control?

The first is the risk of spread in COVID-19. Although Guo was controlled after being found to be positive, it is impossible to determine when he began to carry the virus. Then the more than 100 single takeout he sent and many users and restaurants he contacted are undoubtedly potential communication risks. In particular, Guo also carries out take-away distribution across regions, which is more risky.

Secondly, it caused panic among residents. Guo has been active outside for so many days, but he is still moving freely. This is definitely a panic for residents who are statically managed. Who knows who Guo contacted in the takeaway, and whether these people crossed with themselves? Especially those who have ordered takeout, they are even more panicked.

In addition, it also affects people's confidence in the government. The government's static management of cities is an effective means of epidemic prevention and control. Most citizens actively cooperated and stayed at home quietly, but some positive cases stayed outside, but the relevant departments did not find them in time, which had to make people question the government's organizational ability in epidemic prevention and control. To say the least, positive people can still move, so what is the point of staying at home?

Finally, it is also a reminder to relevant departments. Even if Guo's case is an example, it shows that there are loopholes in the work of the local epidemic prevention and control department, especially in the control of people who sell riders and run errands. They are highly mobile and their income is unstable. In addition to regulation, the government should also provide good services, not across the board. For example, why is there no special person to conduct nucleic acid testing on foreign sellers and couriers? At least check it regularly.

The epidemic prevention and control work involves a wide range, and it is inevitable that there will be omissions, some of which are easy to make up, and some have serious consequences. This matter concerns thousands of families and cannot be sloppy. As citizens, it is necessary to cooperate with relevant work.