I'm no epidemiologist, but I think we might have to wait another month or two to see if there are any resurgences in China before we can be certain the containment really worked, no? Infectious disease expert Michael Osterholm recently said on a podcast that he and his colleagues expect there to be another outbreak in China within the next few months, once people start fully co-mingling again.

They've done more than lock down in China:

https://twitter.com/MikeIsaac/status/1238604080571772928

I don't see why they would back off of the monitoring and fever clinics without some better measure in place (a vaccine or effective treatment or whatever). It's of course very likely there will be new cases. The likelihood of unchecked spreading seems much lower.

I know nothing about all of this, but I guess the idea is there are too many closely concentrated people and too many variables to control for, so if there are new cases, they could potentially turn into new outbreaks if they aren't detected and handled in time. And it's likely just a matter of probability whether or not they all get detected. Even the most advanced and restrictive surveillance state in the world can't possibly catch everything with 100% probability.

I think there's a decent chance the outcome won't be nearly as bad as the worst case scenario, but the worst case scenario is pretty scary. There is a non-zero probability that this wave is only beginning, that there are going to be future outbreaks and pandemic waves this year, and that by year's end there'll be millions of deaths globally.

In the video he talks about taking temperatures every time someone enters a building.

Anyone with a fever is screened for the infection using a portable CT scanner (they don't do a full image, they take a couple slices).

People with suspect CT results are tested and held in quarantine until the test result comes in.

The virus simply will not spread as fast in those conditions as it did when local officials were covering up, and people can start moving around more without backing off those conditions.

Also, Wuhan and Italy's north had their hospitals put under severe stress early on. That could have driven fatalities up as well.

If you're suspicious of the numbers of China, why would you not be suspicious when they said they 'controlled' the spread? I mean the press has all but forgotten about China and focused on the global spread, so there's probably less information being reported from China. Unless I had some good evidence apart from China state news sources (which is pretty much where this info is coming from), I would remain suspicious.