Zero-COVID

Part of a series on the
COVID-19 pandemic
COVID-19 (disease) SARS-CoV-2 (virus) Cases Deaths
Timeline 2019 2020 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November responses December responses 2021 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November responses December responses 2022 January responses February responses March responses April responses May responses June responses July responses August responses September responses October responses November December 2023
Locations By country and territory Africa Antarctica Asia Europe North America Oceania South America By conveyance Cruise ships Naval ships
International response Endemic phase Evacuations Face masks International aid Origin Lockdowns by country Misinformation by governments Fake treatments Social distancing Software Travel United Nations World Health Organization WTO IP waiver Undercounting of deaths COVID-19 apps Zero-COVID National responses Africa China European Union Germany Ghana India Ireland Netherlands New Zealand Nigeria Philippines Russia Sweden UK government US federal government Vietnam
Medical response Disease testing Breathalyzer Development Drug development Drug repurposing Public health mitigation Vaccines History Research VITT Deployment Authorizations Operation Warp Speed Misinformation and hesitancy US Vaccine card Vaccine passports Current vaccines CoronaVac Covaxin Convidecia Janssen Medigen Moderna Novavax Oxford–AstraZeneca Pfizer–BioNTech Sinopharm BIBP Sputnik V
Variants Variants of concern Alpha Beta Gamma Delta Omicron Other variants Epsilon Zeta Eta Theta Iota Kappa Lambda Mu Cluster 5 Lineage B.1.617
Economic impact and recession Arts and culture Aviation Cannabis Cinema films Disney Fashion Financial markets Food industry Food security Journalism Music Performing arts Retail Shipping Television US sportscasting programs Tourism Video games By country Canada India Ireland Malaysia New Zealand Russia UK US By sport Association football Baseball Basketball Combat sports Cricket Disc golf Gaelic games Gridiron football Ice hockey Motorsport Rugby league
Impacts Long COVID Neurological and psychological symptoms Post-exertional malaise Society Animals Alzheimer's disease patients Black people Crime Death rates by country Disability Domestic violence Emergency evacuations Education Female Environment Hospitals Language LGBT community Long-term care Media coverage Mental health Migration Military Notable deaths Other health issues Popular culture Protests Pregnancy Prisons Religion Catholic Church Hajj Science and technology Social media Strikes Suicides Telehealth Xenophobia and racism Politics Diplomacy Ireland Malaysia New Zealand Russia UK US
COVID-19 portal
v t e

Zero-COVID, also known as COVID-Zero and "Find, Test, Trace, Isolate, and Support" (FTTIS), was a public health policy implemented by some countries, especially China, during the COVID-19 pandemic.^[1][a] In contrast to the "living with COVID-19" strategy, the zero-COVID strategy was purportedly one "of control and maximum suppression".^[1] Public health measures used to implement the strategy included as contact tracing, mass testing, border quarantine, lockdowns, and mitigation software in order to stop community transmission of COVID-19 as soon as it was detected. The goal of the strategy was to get the area back to zero new infections and resume normal economic and social activities.^[1][4]

A zero-COVID strategy consisted of two phases: an initial suppression phase in which the virus is eliminated locally using aggressive public health measures, and a sustained containment phase, in which normal economic and social activities resume and public health measures are used to contain new outbreaks before they spread widely.^[4] This strategy was utilized to varying degrees by Australia, Bhutan,^[5][6] Atlantic and Northern Canada,^[7] mainland China, Hong Kong,^[8] Macau,^[9] Malaysia,^[10] Montserrat, New Zealand, North Korea, Northern Ireland, Singapore, Scotland,^[11] South Korea,^[12] Taiwan,^[13] East Timor, Thailand, Tonga,^[14] and Vietnam.^[15][16] By late 2021, due to challenges with the increased transmissibility of the Delta and Omicron variants, and also the arrival of COVID-19 vaccines, many countries had phased out zero-COVID, with mainland China being the last major country to do so in December 2022.^[17]

Experts have differentiated between zero-COVID, which was an elimination strategy, and mitigation strategies that attempted to lessen the effects of the virus on society, but which still tolerated some level of transmission within the community.^[18][4] These initial strategies could be pursued sequentially or simultaneously during the acquired immunity phase through natural and vaccine-induced immunity.^[19]

Advocates of zero-COVID pointed to the far lower death rates and higher economic growth in countries that pursued elimination during the first year of the pandemic (i.e., prior to widespread vaccination) compared with countries that pursued mitigation,^[18] and argued that swift, strict measures to eliminate the virus allowed a faster return to normal life.^[18] Opponents of zero-COVID argued that, similar to the challenges faced with the flu or the common cold, achieving the complete elimination of a respiratory virus like SARS-CoV-2 may not have been a realistic goal.^[20] To achieve zero-COVID in an area with high infection rates, one review estimated that it would take three months of strict lockdown.^[21]

Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).