Interesting. Compare with China. The first evidence of the new virus infecting humans was in late November (but not identified until Dec 10). Mitigation efforts did not begin until Wuhan was locked down on January 23, two months later. Yet, China claims only 83,135 infections? https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1249528235609731072

In December the British government intelligence agency told the PM that infections were at least 16 times higher than the Chinese were reporting (if I recall correctly). This seems likely overestimated, but surely the epidemic was many times greater in magnitude than China says.

If the official numbers are really this far off, it will be impossible to keep a lid on it within China. Eventually, the truth will come out, and it could get very ugly.

This sheds new light on Chinese government reactions. By the time the lock down was ordered, there had to have been hundreds of thousands of infections throughout the country.

Instead of being a prudent move to keep the virus from spreading to new communities, the lock down was thus a panicked move to keep it from spreading within communities where it probably already existed, and to forestall a complete meltdown.

This would explain why instead of just cutting off rail and air links to Wuhan, nearly everyone nationwide was pretty much confined to their houses.

There was also talk early on that the area in Beijing hardest hit with the virus was around Zhongnanhai (the compound where the Chinese leadership lives),

and rumors that Xi Jinping may himself have been infected (he was not seen in public for several critical weeks, and the one most recent video available during that time showed him suppressing a cough).

If the government timeline is accepted, none of this makes sense. If, on the other hand, the virus was already running through the country uncontrolled, everything falls into place.