1, academic disagreement: Zhong Nanshan thinks that in a paper published by Professor Kerr, he questioned and criticized China's epidemic prevention and control policies, but these views are not in line with the facts. Therefore, I hope that through open academic debate, I can correct Professor Kerr's wrong views and safeguard China's academic reputation and dignity.

2. Epidemic prevention experience: Zhong Nanshan thinks that China's epidemic prevention experience is of great significance to global epidemic prevention, while Professor Kerr, as an internationally renowned epidemiologist, ignores the importance of epidemic prevention experience. Therefore, it is hoped that by challenging Professor Kerr, more people will understand and attach importance to China's epidemic prevention experience and make greater contributions to the global epidemic prevention cause.