After 7 months of living under the threat of Covid-19 (though I seem to remember it being around from quite a few months earlier in various countries) I'm rather glad a) to be here and b) to be in Thailand in preference to those other countries with a poorer record of dealing with the problem.
In Thailand, our borders are virtually closed, restricting access from other countries in most cases.
Elsewhere, borders have not been so carefully restricted.
That is either a massive coincidence, or the restrictions here have worked which I prefer to believe.
If every city in other countries was treated as an areas with closed borders, people would not (in the main) be allowed to cross, and - logically - there would then be fewer cases of Covid-19. I can imagine the wailing and screaming from some quarters if that had happened though, as Mildred (who died a month later because the borders were open) howled that she couldn't visit her pal in the next town to play Bingo with their mates.
Of course no one knows for sure what would have happened had such a 100% lockdown been implemented for 28 days. I would predict though that there would have been fewer funerals in the UK for example had that been the case, and that it is more likely that the epidemic there would have ended by now than by allowing free movement between infected areas.
Is this relevant to Surin and this particular thread? I believe it is, in order to compare and recognise the importance of restricting the spread of the virus at a timely juncture, and not when 42,115 deaths and more than half a million cases have occurred in the UK - and counting - without any sign of an end in sight there.