Even as airports around the world began screening travellers from China, with travel bans issued in 13 Chinese cities to stop the potential spread of the novel coronavirus, the World Health Organisation decided not to declare the 2019-nCoV outbreak in China a public health emergency of international concern.

So how bad does bad have to be? The virus has already claimed at least 81 lives, and some reports estimate that thousands of people have been infected with the virus – including people outside of China. But as Tom Solomon writes, declaring a global public health emergency can have unnecessary effects on trade and tourism, and suggest a country can’t control the outbreak on their own – which is likely why the WHO remains cautious.

Scientists continue to search for answers about which animals in Wuhan might have been the source of this virus, and how infectious the virus is. But the current response by public health officials in China offers some hope that the disease won’t be as bad as 2003’s Sars outbreak, which killed nearly 800 people before it was contained. The government and people of China are more experienced in handling an outbreak this time, which might help minimise the global impact of this unpredictable virus.

In other health news, researchers have found that it might be possible to improve symptoms in autistic children using a cheap, generic drug widely used to treat high blood pressure and swelling – a month’s supply costs no more than a tenner. And why businesses that crack down on toilet breaks won’t improve their productivity – they’d be better off improving the working life of employees.

Contact us here to have your event listed.

For sponsorship opportunities, email us here