The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused nations to adopt unprecedented control measures in order to curb its spread.As the first nation to respond, China's aggressive control measures appeared to have been effective in suppressing the first wave and keeping new cases under control. Here, we provide the historical context and details of China's public health response to COVID-19. We highlight the lessons and impact of the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak, which demonstrated the importance of transparency, surveillance and testing laboratories during an outbreak. We provide an overview of China's response strategy that was based on the principles of early detection, isolation, management and treatment and involved not only the largescale coordination of multiple governmental bodies but also grass-root community participation throughout the country. These community-based organizations conducted active surveillance for febrile cases and provided support for those in quarantine and communities in lockdown. Importantly, these broader measures were supported by digital technology, including the extensive use of internet-based platforms and mobile applications (APPs). While there have been no significant increases in case numbers since April, there is still much concern over a second wave, considering the resumption of work and school, the lifting of travel restrictions and the outbreaks occurring globally. Control measures has since been implemented by provincial authorities, which includes continued surveillance and rapid testing. Although China's strict control measures may not suit every nation, the principles of early detection and isolation continue to hold true and have been a cornerstone of the initial and ongoing response to the COVID-19.

No abstract

No abstract

The induction of a specific antibody response has long been accepted as a serological hallmark of recent infection or antigen exposure. Much of our understanding of the influenza antibody response has been derived from studying antibodies that target the hemagglutinin (HA) protein. However, growing evidence points to limitations associated with this approach. In this review, we aim to highlight the issue of antibody non-responsiveness after influenza virus infection and vaccination. We will then provide an overview of the major factors known to influence antibody responsiveness to influenza after infection and vaccination. We discuss the biological factors such as age, sex, influence of prior immunity, genetics, and some chronic infections that may affect the induction of influenza antibody responses. We also discuss the technical factors, such as assay choices, strain variations, and viral properties that may influence the sensitivity of the assays used to measure influenza antibodies. Understanding these factors will hopefully provide a more comprehensive picture of what influenza immunogenicity and protection means, which will be important in our effort to improve influenza vaccines.