Increased public hygiene as an alternative to social isolation - health stats and economics

[swissaustrian]

EDIT: TLDR for the speed readers

1. The data does not show a difference in the rate of spread between countries that have enacted draconian social distancing versus the countries that mostly just use face masks, gloves and frequent hand and surface cleaning/disinfection.
2. It costs about 10 times less to equip an entire population with 3 masks, 3 pairs of gloves and a gallon of rubbing alcohol per day compared to a draconian lockdown.
3. The cost of the protective equipment and cleaners is less than 5 dollars per day and person. Compare that to the 1200 dollars that the goverment is dumping on everyone and the 2+ trillion in corporate wellfare.

---------

The following proposal is more than a thought experiment. It is basically enacted in South Korea, according to the leading epidemiologist in South Korea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAk7aX5hksU

1. Motivation:
The prohibition of the free movement of people has devastating economic, social and psychological effects. Spillovers to the free movement of goods are also unavoidable. From an opportunity cost perspective, alternative concepts should be explored.

2. Risk group:
Corona epidemic deaths have almost exclusively been limited to people with serious pre-existing conditions (hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular, respiratory) and very high age. The first 2500 deaths in Italy had 99.2 % pre-existing conditions and a median age of 80.5 years. These trends are similar all over the world. Treating entire populations as equally at risk is questionable.

3. How effective is social isolation? Data is inconclusive.
Measures to limit the spread are based on probabilistic reasoning. By isolating people from each other, human to human transmission is supposedly drastically reduced. This does NOT address INdirect transmission via intermediaries such as surfaces and ventilation/air conditioning by the way! It is curious that the rate of spread seems to be rather similar in many countries, independent from the severity and timing of social isolation measures (see chart below). The data does not allow for a grouping by liberal measures in the Netherlands and South Korea vs draconian measures in Italy and China . Public hygiene and personal hygiene customs seem to be important, too.

Here is picture of universal mask wearing from Seoul, South Korea. Social distancing? Not so much!:


The following graph shows that one can not distinguish the rate of spread by the severity of social isolation and distancing measures imposed by governements:



4. Alternative to social isolation: Increased public and personal hygiene measures, ie everybody is a health care worker now
Health care workers cannot isolate by social distancing. They are protected/isolated by gloves, masks and rigorous hygiene. Let’s explore applying similar protective and hygienical measures on an entire population instead of house arrests. High risk individuals could still be additionally isolated. They are overwhelmingly of retirement age, so they have time to isolate.
a. Universal wearing of masks and disposable gloves
Two way (mutual) mask wearing is essential to stop droplets at the source (E-mission) and not at the target (I-mission). Less air/droplet-tight masks are sufficient when applied at the source. It is about reducing the airborne concentration.
b. Continuous disinfection of surfaces
- Important surfaces: Electronic devices (Cellphones, computers etc), doors and keys, food and water, packaging, real estate and furniture, transportation
- Cleaning/disinfecting of public surfaces could be a way to provide jobs to low skill unemployed people.

5. Economics, including opportunity costs:
a. Cost of current draconian social isolation measures: up to 25% of GDP p.a. Entire industries are out of business.
b. Cost of supplying every citizen with the following protective goods per day:
 3 Masks, 1 $ per mask (actual: 58 cents ) = 3 $
 3 disposable gloves, 0.25 per pair (actual < 0.18 $ ) = 0.75 $
 A gallon of disinfectants (isopropyl or ethanol diluted with 30% H2O), 0.5 $ (actual ca. 0.33 $/gallon for isopropyl 70% , density adjusted )
 TOTAL COST = 4.75 $ per citizen and day. = 1733.75 $ per year and citizen. This estimate is very pessimistic.
c. In essence, the cost is approximately 50% of health insurance premiums in developed countries
d. In terms of GDP per capita (US: 65’000), the cost of increased public hygiene is about 2.5% of GDP, compared to 25% of GDP from the shutdown of the economy.
e. The cost of the protective equipment and cleaners is less than 5 dollars per day and person. Compare that to the 1200 dollars that the goverment is dumping on everyone and the 2+ trillion in corporate wellfare.

6. Questions:
a. Relative effectiveness of social isolation vs individual protection and hygiene? Data is inconclusive.
b. Possibility to manufacture protective equipment and disinfectants in vast quantities? Yes: scalable, simple processes.

[jmdrake]

Correct. But instead of doing that our government is wantonly destroying the economy, the CDC LIED and said masks were not effective, and now they're giving away trillions to special interests and bribing the American people with a one time $1,200 check while doing nothing to actually stop the spread of the disease except shaming the people brave enough to defy the stupidity of quarantining the healthy instead of the sick.

The following proposal is more than a thought experiment. It is basically enacted in South Korea, according to the leading epidemiologist in South Korea: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAk7aX5hksU

1. Motivation:
The prohibition of the free movement of people has devastating economic, social and psychological effects. Spillovers to the free movement of goods are also unavoidable. From an opportunity cost perspective, alternative concepts should be explored.

2. Risk group:
Corona epidemic deaths have almost exclusively been limited to people with serious pre-existing conditions (hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular, respiratory) and very high age. The first 2500 deaths in Italy had 99.2 % pre-existing conditions and a median age of 80.5 years. These trends are similar all over the world. Treating entire populations as equally at risk is questionable.

3. How effective is social isolation? Data is inconclusive.
Measures to limit the spread are based on probabilistic reasoning. By isolating people from each other, human to human transmission is supposedly drastically reduced. This does NOT address INdirect transmission via intermediaries such as surfaces and ventilation/air conditioning by the way! It is curious that the rate of spread seems to be rather similar in many countries, independent from the severity and timing of social isolation measures (see chart below). The data does not allow for a grouping by liberal measures in the Netherlands and South Korea vs draconian measures in Italy and China . Public hygiene and personal hygiene customs seem to be important, too.

Here is picture of universal mask wearing from Seoul, South Korea. Social distancing? Not so much!:


The following graph shows that one can not distinguish the rate of spread by the severity of social isolation and distancing measures imposed by governements:



4. Alternative to social isolation: Increased public and personal hygiene measures, ie everybody is a health care worker now
Health care workers cannot isolate by social distancing. They are protected/isolated by gloves, masks and rigorous hygiene. Let’s explore applying similar protective and hygienical measures on an entire population instead of house arrests. High risk individuals could still be additionally isolated. They are overwhelmingly of retirement age, so they have time to isolate.
a. Universal wearing of masks and disposable gloves
Two way (mutual) mask wearing is essential to stop droplets at the source (E-mission) and not at the target (I-mission). Less air/droplet-tight masks are sufficient when applied at the source. It is about reducing the airborne concentration.
b. Continuous disinfection of surfaces
- Important surfaces: Electronic devices (Cellphones, computers etc), doors and keys, food and water, packaging, real estate and furniture, transportation
- Cleaning/disinfecting of public surfaces could be a way to provide jobs to low skill unemployed people.

5. Economics, including opportunity costs:
a. Cost of current draconian social isolation measures: up to 25% of GDP p.a. Entire industries are out of business.
b. Cost of supplying every citizen with the following protective goods per day:
 3 Masks, 1 $ per mask (actual: 58 cents ) = 3 $
 3 disposable gloves, 0.25 per pair (actual < 0.18 $ ) = 0.75 $
 A gallon of disinfectants (isopropyl or ethanol diluted with 30% H2O), 0.5 $ (actual ca. 0.33 $/gallon for isopropyl 70% , density adjusted )
 TOTAL COST = 4.75 $ per citizen and day. = 1733.75 $ per year and citizen. This estimate is very pessimistic.
c. In essence, the cost is approximately 50% of health insurance premiums in developed countries
d. In terms of GDP per capita (US: 65’000), the cost of increased public hygiene is about 2.5% of GDP, compared to 25% of GDP from the shutdown of the economy.

6. Questions:
a. Relative effectiveness of social isolation vs individual protection and hygiene? Data is inconclusive.
b. Possibility to manufacture protective equipment and disinfectants in vast quantities? Yes: scalable, simple processes.

[nikcers]

Masks alone aren't effective. Its like shooting a crossbow if you don't practice good public health practices correctly in every manner you won't hit your mark. There is no close but no cigar. People don't know how to use the masks and gloves and face shields properly. You have doctors and nurses catching it. You think they don't have good public hygeine?

[jmdrake]

Masks alone aren't effective. Its like shooting a crossbow if you don't practice good public health practices correctly in every manner you won't hit your mark. There is no close but no cigar. People don't know how to use the masks and gloves and face shields properly. You have doctors and nurses catching it. You think they don't have good public hygeine?

Doctors and nurses run into many times the amount of people with the disease than do the average person and some here in the U.S. do not have access to masks. How do I know? Because I've been buying masks and shipping them to healthcare workers! I just sent some n95 respirators to a clinic in rural Alabama where they were literally using paper towels and rubber bands as makeshift masks. Are the n95 respirators 100%? Nope. The "95" means they keep out 95% of particulates in the air. That's another 5% that are not kept out. Some people are reusing masks because of short supply. If you disinfect a mask with bleach or other harsh chemicals, the masks effectiveness is reduced from 95% to 75%. As for "using the mask correctly" there should be more said in public about how to do that than rather than this stupid "shelter at home" message we keep hearing ad naseum that almost nobody is following because it isn't realistic.

[nikcers]

Doctors and nurses run into many times the amount of people with the disease than do the average person and some here in the U.S. do not have access to masks. How do I know? Because I've been buying masks and shipping them to healthcare workers! I just sent some n95 respirators to a clinic in rural Alabama where they were literally using paper towels and rubber bands as makeshift masks. Are the n95 respirators 100%? Nope. The "95" means they keep out 95% of particulates in the air. That's another 5% that are not kept out. Some people are reusing masks because of short supply. If you disinfect a mask with bleach or other harsh chemicals, the masks effectiveness is reduced from 95% to 75%. As for "using the mask correctly" there should be more said in public about how to do that than rather than this stupid "shelter at home" message we keep hearing ad naseum that almost nobody is following because it isn't realistic.

Yeah but here's how it goes down. The federal government recommends stuff all the time that's common sense that some people will refuse and that's their right. This is a good way to manage necessary business.

[Brian4Liberty]

a. Universal wearing of masks and disposable gloves
Two way (mutual) mask wearing is essential to stop droplets at the source (E-mission) and not at the target (I-mission). Less air/droplet-tight masks are sufficient when applied at the source. It is about reducing the airborne concentration.
b. Continuous disinfection of surfaces
- Important surfaces: Electronic devices (Cellphones, computers etc), doors and keys, food and water, packaging, real estate and furniture, transportation
- Cleaning/disinfecting of public surfaces could be a way to provide jobs to low skill unemployed people.

Most important things that can be done. Add to that isolation of the sick and the vulnerable groups from potential carriers and the economy can re-open.

[jmdrake]

Yeah but here's how it goes down. The federal government recommends stuff all the time that's common sense that some people will refuse and that's their right. This is a good way to manage necessary business.

Except sometimes the federal governments recommendations are backwards. This is one of those times.

[Brian4Liberty]

Masks alone aren't effective. Its like shooting a crossbow if you don't practice good public health practices correctly in every manner you won't hit your mark. There is no close but no cigar. People don't know how to use the masks and gloves and face shields properly. You have doctors and nurses catching it. You think they don't have good public hygeine?

Ignorance is not a virtue. Don't repeat the failed establishment propaganda. Yes, the more the better in terms of stopping the spread, but don't give us the tired BS about people can't use masks properly and n95 masks need to be fitted by a professional. Every tradesman knows how to use a mask or respirator, it's pretty simple.

[nikcers]

Ignorance is not a virtue. Don't repeat the failed establishment propaganda. Yes, the more the better in terms of stopping the spread, but don't give us the tired BS about people can't use masks properly and n95 masks need to be fitted by a professional. Every tradesman knows how to use a mask or respirator, it's pretty simple.

Everyone is going to wash their hands not touch their face or use infected masks or share them even the kid that throws dog $#@! over my brothers fence?

[jmdrake]

Everyone is going to wash their hands not touch their face or use infected masks or share them even the kid that throws dog $#@! over my brothers fence?

Who the fvck cares what "everyone" does? Some people may reuse a condom. That doesn't mean most people aren't better off using them when having illicit sex. And you don't have to have illicit sex. You do have to get out of your fvcking house at some point.

[nikcers]

Who the fvck cares what "everyone" does? Some people may reuse a condom. That doesn't mean most people aren't better off using them when having illicit sex. And you don't have to have illicit sex. You do have to get out of your fvcking house at some point.

How many deaths would be acceptable to you? Would you sacrifice yourself?

[jmdrake]

How many deaths would be acceptable to you? Would you sacrifice yourself?

No dumbass. You are a complete moron. South Korea has fewer deaths than the U.S. and they are not shut the economy down jackass! Same for Taiwan. I want to do what works you sack of maggot guts! That's why I'm actually buying masks for healthcare workers. What are you doing besides sounding stupid on the Internet!

[nikcers]

No dumbass. You are a complete moron. South Korea has fewer deaths than the U.S. and they are not shut the economy down jackass! Same for Taiwan. I want to do what works you sack of maggot guts! That's why I'm actually buying masks for healthcare workers. What are you doing besides sounding stupid on the Internet!

Less infections doesn't necessarily mean better hygiene we had a ton more people traveling here than South Korea. Tourist areas got hit hardest.

[bv3]

How many deaths would be acceptable to you? Would you sacrifice yourself?

oh, this melodrama. For the kids, yeah?

JM, the economy was cooked already. The FED was doing tens of billions of dollars in repos a night since, like, October? But, yeah--not allowing people to work for a few months isn't going to ameliorate the situation.

The masks do work. They said don't buy masks because THERE WERE NO MASKS TO BUY. It was a propaganda coup, as I said in another thread, to head off the inconvenient questions that might arise when people realize precisely why it is there are no masks to buy. Overseas manufacture of essential products, and foreign nationals who bought out the supply of masks in February when the CDC and WHO were still falsely assuring the Western nations that, "This isn't a big deal."

Not that any of this matters. That quiet noise on American streets? That's a fat lady singing.

[jmdrake]

Less infections doesn't necessarily mean better hygiene we had a ton more people traveling here than South Korea. Tourist areas got hit hardest.

How I feel after reading 90% of your posts.

[nikcers]

oh, this melodrama. For the kids, yeah?

JM, the economy was cooked already. The FED was doing tens of billions of dollars in repos a night since, like, October? But, yeah--not allowing people to work for a few months isn't going to ameliorate the situation.

The masks do work. They said don't buy masks because THERE WERE NO MASKS TO BUY. It was a propaganda coup, as I said in another thread, to head off the inconvenient questions that might arise when people realize precisely why it is there are no masks to buy. Overseas manufacture of essential products, and foreign nationals who bought out the supply of masks in February when the CDC and WHO were still falsely assuring the Western nations that, "This isn't a big deal."

For the kids? it's the people with poor lung health like Rand Paul who get hurt by it..

[nikcers]

How I feel after reading 90% of your posts.

you"re being ignorant here. Are you saying areas with higher viral counts don't have highest infection rates?? Places more traveled by the source of the virus??

[bv3]

For the kids? it's the people with poor lung health like Rand Paul who get hurt by it..

Nothing is stopping anyone from quarantining themselves. Shutting down the economy to keep everyone inside is ridiculous--unless, of course, you want things to get worse. Many do.

See, individuals have these things called choices to make. Let them make their choices. You make yours, I'll make mine, and on it goes this thing of ours.

[nikcers]

Nothing is stopping anyone from quarantining themselves. Shutting down the economy to keep everyone inside is ridiculous--unless, of course, you want things to get worse. Many do.

See, individuals have these things called choices to make. Let them make their choices. You make yours, I'll make mine, and on it goes this thing of ours.

Shutting down the economy started with the travel restrictions from countries that had it. It was a sure thing at that point. We depend on tourism and business from other countries to stay on top. We could of just let a lot of high viral count people here but that would of resulted in millions of more infections which would of flood the government managed medical system.

[jmdrake]

oh, this melodrama. For the kids, yeah?

JM, the economy was cooked already. The FED was doing tens of billions of dollars in repos a night since, like, October? But, yeah--not allowing people to work for a few months isn't going to ameliorate the situation.

No argument there. Our country has collectively been one paycheck away from poverty for some time. People are on the margins. And that margin for many people has now been taken away.

The masks do work. They said don't buy masks because THERE WERE NO MASKS TO BUY. It was a propaganda coup, as I said in another thread, to head off the inconvenient questions that might arise when people realize precisely why it is there are no masks to buy. Overseas manufacture of essential products, and foreign nationals who bought out the supply of masks in February when the CDC and WHO were still falsely assuring the Western nations that, "This isn't a big deal."

Not that any of this matters. That quiet noise on American streets? That's a fat lady singing.

Trump and Congress new about this at least by January 24th. They should have stopped the retarded impeachment and focused on the economic and fear tidal wave that was coming. While foreigners were buying masks in American, U.S. Navy ships should have been backing up to ports in China buying whatever masks they could. I used to work once a week at a Dixie paper plate and bowl factory doing computer support. That factory is in the U.S. It and other factories should have been re-tooled to make masks. And then, and now, people should be encouraged to make their own. In WW II the feds gave out free plans on making your own wood gas generators because gasoline was in short supply. It's easier to make a mask than it is a wood gas generator. The CDC is now saying "make your own mask" as well. I honestly believe this is being done on purpose. I believe this is about control and money. I could be wrong.

[bv3]

Shutting down the economy started with the travel restrictions from countries that had it. It was a sure thing at that point. We depend on tourism and business from other countries to stay on top. We could of just let a lot of high viral count people here but that would of resulted in millions of more infections which would of flood the government ran medical system.

Strawman down! And we did let a lot of high viral count people (elegant use of language) here. While the WHO and the CDC were giving false assurances. Stay on top? This isn't about staying on top, this is about survival. But, sweat it not, sweetie, your type have prevailed! Looking forward to Weimar V. America.

And then, in the doldrums, a parade of news anchors will bruit how much worse it could have been--when people are eating sawdust.

[nikcers]

Strawman down! And we did let a lot of high viral count people (elegant use of language) here. While the WHO and the CDC were giving false assurances. Stay on top? This isn't about staying on top, this is about survival. But, sweat it not, sweetie, your type have prevailed! Looking forward to Weimar V. America.

And then, in the doldrums, a parade of news anchors will bruit how much worse it could have been--when people are eating sawdust.

We have huge sectors of the country that depend on international tourism and travel. Now you are being ignorant. We didn't have an accurate test. Even China had inaccurate tests.

[jmdrake]

Shutting down the economy started with the travel restrictions from countries that had it. It was a sure thing at that point. We depend on tourism and business from other countries to stay on top. We could of just let a lot of high viral count people here but that would of resulted in millions of more infections which would of flood the government managed medical system.

Foreign tourism was already falling before the emergence of SARS-COV-2.

https://qz.com/1716444/the-us-touris...hrinking-fast/

We would have been fine without it. More Americans would have stayed and vacationed at home. And tourism is a relatively small part of the U.S. economy. Saying we are "dependent" on it is like saying a fat person is "dependent" on Oreos. Sure they are nice to have, but you can live without them.

[jmdrake]

We have huge sectors of the country that depend on international tourism and travel. Now you are being ignorant. We didn't have an accurate test. Even China had inaccurate tests.

Sectors versus THE ENTIRE FREAKING ECONOMY! Absorbing those sectors would not have been a big deal if the entire economy hadn't been shut down.

[nikcers]

Foreign tourism was already falling before the emergence of SARS-COV-2.

https://qz.com/1716444/the-us-touris...hrinking-fast/

We would have been fine without it. More Americans would have stayed and vacationed at home. And tourism is a relatively small part of the U.S. economy. Saying we are "dependent" on it is like saying a fat person is "dependent" on Oreos. Sure they are nice to have, but you can live without them.

We would of not been fine without it. For one he couldn't of even got it done. The Democrats were saying it wasnt as bad as the flu virus and calling him racist for restricting travel.

[jmdrake]

We would of not been fine without it. For one he couldn't of even got it done. The Democrats were saying it wasnt as bad as the flu virus and calling him racist for restricting travel.

Trump was the one initially saying COVID-19 wasn't that bad and the Democrats were attacking him for not taking it seriously.

[nikcers]

Trump was the one initially saying COVID-19 wasn't that bad and the Democrats were attacking him for not taking it seriously.

No the opposite that's what they said when he floated travel ban in Jan.

[jmdrake]

you"re being ignorant here. Are you saying areas with higher viral counts don't have highest infection rates?? Places more traveled by the source of the virus??

You are the ignorant one.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/busine...t_17662347.htm
South Korea becoming top tourist destination
By Shi Jing in Shanghai (China Daily)
Updated: 2014-07-08 07:07
CommentsPrintMail
LargeMediumSmall
South Korea becoming top tourist destination
Guard Mounting at Deoksugung Palace in Seoul, South Korea. South Korea is expected to overtake Thailand to become the top travel destination for Chinese tourists this year, China's largest online travel agency Ctrip.com International Ltd said on Monday. [Photo / IC]

Record number of Chinese visitors booking tours, Ctrip reports, could bump Thailand to second place

South Korea is expected to overtake Thailand to become the top travel destination for Chinese tourists this year, China's largest online travel agency Ctrip.com International Ltd said on Monday.

In the first half of 2014, a record 300,000 Chinese tourists, 70 percent of them female, booked trips to South Korea through Ctrip, the company said in its 2014 ROK Travel Report.

About 4 million Chinese tourists visited South Korea in 2013, up 40 percent year-on-year, with another gain of that size expected this year.

Travel is being supported by policies such as visa-free short-term visits to South Korea. Jeju Island, for example, attracted 1.81 million Chinese tourists last year, the largest single group of inbound visitors.

Shanghai, Beijing and Guangzhou account for the largest percentage of outbound Chinese tourists, but second- and third-tier cities are also seeing rapid growth.

South Korea becoming top tourist destination

Seoul, Jeju Island and Gangwon-do in South Korea's northeast are the three most popular destinations.

Xue Qin, a sales manager at a textile machinery company based in Wuxi, Jiangsu province, took a brief trip to South Korea in May, her second visit to the country. While her previous visit took her to Jeju Island, she stayed in Seoul for five days this time, and her total cost was only about 4,000 yuan ($645).

"For women, Seoul is like heaven on earth, with plenty of choices for cosmetics and luxury products. From what I can see, the prices are cheaper than those in Hong Kong and the cost of visiting South Korea is lower. So I think South Korea's a better choice now," she said.

July to September is the peak season for trips to South Korea, accounting for about 43 percent of the tourists. According to the Ctrip report, about 51 percent of the tourists go on package tours. Among all the tourists, 60 percent were born in the 1980s and 20 percent were born in the 1990s.

Ctrip said that the growing number of Chinese tourists to South Korea is the combined result of easier visa procedures and improved transport capacity of airlines and cruise ships.

Feng Liyi, an urban planning engineer based in Shanghai, took a cruise trip with his wife to South Korea in June. He noted that "there are now plenty of cruise companies providing various itineraries to South Korea".

The South Korea business division of Ctrip's tourism department said that bilateral high-level visits have helped increase communication, and that has been reflected by increasing travel.

More Chinese tourists have chosen to visit South Korea to know it better. Their reasons for traveling range from shopping and meeting celebrities to attending concerts.

[jmdrake]

No the opposite that's what they said when he floated travel ban in Jan.

Bvllshyt. The January travel ban did not include China.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN21739V

[nikcers]

You are the ignorant one.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/busine...t_17662347.htm
South Korea becoming top tourist destination
By Shi Jing in Shanghai (China Daily)
Updated: 2014-07-08 07:07
CommentsPrintMail
LargeMediumSmall
South Korea becoming top tourist destination
Guard Mounting at Deoksugung Palace in Seoul, South Korea. South Korea is expected to overtake Thailand to become the top travel destination for Chinese tourists this year, China's largest online travel agency Ctrip.com International Ltd said on Monday. [Photo / IC]

Record number of Chinese visitors booking tours, Ctrip reports, could bump Thailand to second place

South Korea is expected to overtake Thailand to become the top travel destination for Chinese tourists this year, China's largest online travel agency Ctrip.com International Ltd said on Monday.

In the first half of 2014, a record 300,000 Chinese tourists, 70 percent of them female, booked trips to South Korea through Ctrip, the company said in its 2014 ROK Travel Report.

About 4 million Chinese tourists visited South Korea in 2013, up 40 percent year-on-year, with another gain of that size expected this year.

Travel is being supported by policies such as visa-free short-term visits to South Korea. Jeju Island, for example, attracted 1.81 million Chinese tourists last year, the largest single group of inbound visitors.

Shanghai, Beijing and Guangzhou account for the largest percentage of outbound Chinese tourists, but second- and third-tier cities are also seeing rapid growth.

South Korea becoming top tourist destination

Seoul, Jeju Island and Gangwon-do in South Korea's northeast are the three most popular destinations.

Xue Qin, a sales manager at a textile machinery company based in Wuxi, Jiangsu province, took a brief trip to South Korea in May, her second visit to the country. While her previous visit took her to Jeju Island, she stayed in Seoul for five days this time, and her total cost was only about 4,000 yuan ($645).

"For women, Seoul is like heaven on earth, with plenty of choices for cosmetics and luxury products. From what I can see, the prices are cheaper than those in Hong Kong and the cost of visiting South Korea is lower. So I think South Korea's a better choice now," she said.

July to September is the peak season for trips to South Korea, accounting for about 43 percent of the tourists. According to the Ctrip report, about 51 percent of the tourists go on package tours. Among all the tourists, 60 percent were born in the 1980s and 20 percent were born in the 1990s.

Ctrip said that the growing number of Chinese tourists to South Korea is the combined result of easier visa procedures and improved transport capacity of airlines and cruise ships.

Feng Liyi, an urban planning engineer based in Shanghai, took a cruise trip with his wife to South Korea in June. He noted that "there are now plenty of cruise companies providing various itineraries to South Korea".

The South Korea business division of Ctrip's tourism department said that bilateral high-level visits have helped increase communication, and that has been reflected by increasing travel.

More Chinese tourists have chosen to visit South Korea to know it better. Their reasons for traveling range from shopping and meeting celebrities to attending concerts.

Places with high death tolls have high population density. You get it by breathing or touching infected surfaces. More hosts close to each other touching infected surfaces means more real estate and lots of chances for viral reproduction.

In New York City, Chinese tourists represent the second-largest group of foreign travelers. (Visitors from Britain are No. 1.)

Nationwide, China was the third-largest source of overseas visitors to the United States in 2018, according to the U.S. Travel Association. Among cities, New York was the top destination, followed by Los Angeles.