virus fake

It does help, good exercise, gonna do some jump rope now, thanks! ;)

Ah, so your least favorite body part is Uh-huh-wuh-huh-uh-huh.

View attached image.

even in ancient times ( when diseases like leprosy, were incurable), only those who were infected were kept in quarantine.

There's.. just so much to raise an eyebrow at, within their statement, to begin with.
It's hard to even know how I should structure this, in the sense of determining where I should start poking at it.

-

Okay, let's due it in chronological order, then.
First off, ancient civilizations had both crude antibiotics and established practices of isolating or excluding the sick.
The Book of Leviticus, for example, dates somewhere within the estimated range of 538 and 332 BCE, and details some basic quarantine practices related to leprosy. (Nevermind that quarantine is a historic practice associated with leprosy to begin with.) Similarly, the Egypt of around 1550 B.C is well-established in having had basic medicine practices, including rudimentary antibiotic practices.

( So, if we ignore the point about leprosy specifically, it becomes pretty hard to make any clear distinction of "before" and "after" in medical practices of "ancient times". Rather, what we can firmly determine, is that medical practices in ancient times were emphatically bad, and not worthy of consideration against modern standards. )

Second, the modern concept of quarantine was first established in the 1300s, well preceeding the modern form of treatment brought about by the introduction of penicillin in 1928. Venice, who is also responsible for coining the originating term for "quarantine", put practices into place against bubonic plague in 1370.

This was followed in 1377 by the Republic of Ragusa (Croatia) putting general quarantine practices into place. The concept became a fairly familiar practice for governments to use against outbreaks from then-on. Meanwhile, treatment for leprosy didn't see development until the 1940s, with present treatment being based on a treatment first developed in 1981.

( As such, even factoring leprosy into the equation, nothing is added to help the statement obtain any more validity.
To the contrary, it highlights the invaldity of the statement further. )

-

To recap:

In actual ancient times, your options were to stick moldy bread and honey on your wounds and pray. Some centuries later, you could also hope to be excluded and kept away [remember, quarantine is as much about excluding as it is about isolating] to die without any treatment at all.

Then (in the "ancient times" specified by the nest originator) came proper quarantine measures, which included both isolationism and restricted borders/contact. Hundreds of years and countless devastating epidemics later, during which the flaws of the existing quarantine system were highlighted and countermeasures refined, and modern medication was finally discovered.

Even in ancient times ( when diseases like leprosy, were incurable), only those who were infected were kept in quarantine.

With that all in mind, really not seeing how any of that can be considered remotely accurate. Unless the intent was to actually state:

Even in ancient times ( when diseases like leprosy, were incurable), only when they gambled only applied quarantine to those explicitly known to be infected, did quarantine measures have notable flaws, leading to far worse outbreaks than would have otherwise occurred.

Because, sure, in that case, it seems legit enough?

( Finally, as a topper, let's note that historical quarantines favored the ruling class and often involved rather heartless countermeasures [such as the historical steretype of burning down the houses or villages of the infected, with the infected still inside]. )

Because in "ancient times" they were so good at controlling and curing infectious disease and epidemics. Oh wait...

Yeah, we clearly have it so much worse, nowadays. >.>