COVID-19 Plastic Sustainability

Single-use plastics in the age of coronavirus

The coronavirus pandemic has been a blow to efforts in reducing the consumption of single-use plastics. The lockdown saw consumers, warned they may need to self-isolate for 14 days if symptoms developed, stocking up on long-life foods packaged in plastic. Many companies banned reusable products from their stores, forcing people to revert to single-use plastic bags and disposable cups. On top of that, there’s been a surge in PPE usage worldwide. People are buying single-use gloves and masks to protect themselves, alongside copious amounts of hand sanitiser, soaps, and household disinfectants.

Consumer anxiety has been further heightened by plastic lobbyists, who took the opportunity to announce that reusable bags and cups are nowhere near as safe as the single-use plastics their livelihoods depend upon.

The virus survives in droplets coughed, sneezed or spit out and travels through the air until they fall to the ground or hit something in their way. Once it attaches to a surface, unless it’s a surface it can infect, it’s vulnerable to being destroyed. If you can wash something, you can disinfect it from the coronavirus.

Coronavirus particles can hang around for up to twelve days on plastic surfaces, depending on the strain. The good news is that it’s really quite easy to destroy the virus by disinfecting and sanitising surfaces. Basic soap and water is enough to do the trick if you don’t have access to a disinfectant.

Water alone won’t work particularly well. Coronaviruses are surrounded by a hydrophobic envelope layer that prevents water molecules from breaking open the particle and damaging the virus RNA. It’s the addition of soap that’s key. Most household cleaners are fine to sanitise hard surfaces, and fabric can be cleaned in the washing machine with detergent.

With that, let’s break down some of the risks and benefits of single-use plastics compared to their reusable counterparts.

Plastic bags

Vegetables in a single-use plastic shopping bag.
Image by Hans Braxmeier from Pixabay

Businesses that handle food in the UK are required to follow certain safety procedures, ensuring that products are clean and that the chance of infection is as low as possible. This means that there’s not likely to be any contamination of pre-prepared food and drink, or on the outer packaging of most foods. You may still come into contact with the virus if someone who has it (whether or not they realise) has handled something you’re interacting with. This is why it’s important to maintain distance in shops and only touch products you’re intending to buy. 

This goes the same for single-use plastic bags. Nothing makes them inherently more sanitary than anything else in the shop, and unless you yourself are carrying the virus they won’t necessarily be any cleaner than the bags you bring from home. As long as your bags are regularly cleaned (i.e. washing cloth bags and giving plastic ones a quick wipe down with disinfectant) they’re safe to use and you can continue to avoid unnecessary plastic use.


A close up of two reusable coffee cups on a table.
Image by Alexas_Fotos from Pixabay

Again, there are certain standards in the UK that have to be met when you’re being served hot drinks. Your coffee does not have coronavirus floating in it. There’s a risk, just like with supermarket products, that you may touch a surface that’s been contaminated but most shops are carrying out regular sanitation. Staff should be wearing appropriate PPE and everything used to make your drink should have been cleaned before and after. 

Dishwashers are perfectly effective at dealing with virus particles, and scrubbing your cup in the sink with some dish soap will also work if you don’t have access to a dishwasher. If you’re regularly cleaning your reusable cup (and we’d hope you’re washing it between coffees), you should have nothing to worry about.


Cloth face masks with blue and floral patterns hanging from a washing line
Image by congerdesign from Pixabay

The latest announcement from the UK government is that face coverings will be compulsory in shops in England from the 24th of July. Until now, the government has held off advising mask use for the general public but that advice is set to change in light of increasing evidence that masks are effective at limiting the spread of the virus at the population level.

There is a difference between cloth face coverings and masks that qualify as personal protective equipment (PPE). Generally, masks that achieve PPE status are single-use, with re-use only allowed under extremely limited circumstances. Disposable masks absorb moisture after prolonged use, meaning that they won’t protect you any more than a cloth mask will once they’ve been compromised. Masks that meet the N95 standard also need to be fitted properly, and are designed for use in healthcare and surgical settings, where they are changed between patients. The blue surgical masks that many people associate with the term “face mask” are for protecting the wearer from splashes or droplets that may come into contact with the mouth and nose area. They are not as effective at blocking airborne particles that can be breathed.

The majority of people won’t have much need for a mask that meets the standards required for use in hospitals and care environments. Adhering to social distancing measures means a cloth mask should be more than adequate in most situations. They should be washable – and you should aim to clean them after every use.

If you’re looking for the best ways to make a mask, Happy DIY Home has tutorials for several types, including a no-sew version.


Five surgical gloves pegged to a line on a black background.
Image by Ri Butov from Pixabay

Nitrile or latex gloves are the other item of PPE that members of the public can be seen wearing regularly. These are definitely only single-use – reusing disposable gloves is extremely inadvisable. They are difficult to clean, as washing them in water means that you probably won’t get them dry enough to ensure that they’re not going to provide a breeding ground for bacteria. Sterilising them in extremely hot temperatures or with alcohol-based cleaning products changes the physical properties of the glove, rendering them weaker and more prone to tearing or breakage.

A box of disposable gloves may appear sterile. They’re not – and once you’ve touched a couple of surfaces with gloves they’re not going to be much cleaner than your hands. Gloves in a medical or scientific setting are often used to prevent cross-contamination and so would be changed frequently. Most people wearing gloves are not changing them anywhere near as often as would be needed to prevent the transmission of the virus, and there have been suggestions that gloves may lull people into a false sense of security, making them less likely to follow sanitation procedures that are just as necessary with gloves as without.

It’s more effective, and far kinder to the environment, to go without the gloves and instead ensure you are continuing to wash your hands regularly.

The use of disposable plastics and single-use PPE during the pandemic cannot be avoided in some cases – hospitals and healthcare providers absolutely need them to limit the spread of the virus. It’s really not necessary, however, for the public to avoid reusable and environmentally-conscious options when they’re for personal use. Most of these can be sanitised fairly easily, and single use plastics outside of a medical setting are often no cleaner or safer than their eco-friendly counterparts.

Featured image credit: Image by Willfried Wende from Pixabay

COVID-19 Health

Emotional Wellbeing: 9 Ways to Get Your Happiness Locked Down on Lockdown

With the UK Prime Minister announcing a nation-wide lockdown earlier this week after several days of social distancing, it’s safe to say that the Covid-19 outbreak is having a major impact on everyone’s lives. It’s easy to get overwhelmed – especially as the virus is the only topic on the news right now. We’re all facing the possibility of at least a few weeks staying inside at home, and that’s going to have a knock-on effect on people’s emotional wellbeing.

If you’re reading this, your brain is probably completely saturated with alarming news and statistics about the novel coronavirus. This article isn’t going to add to your stress – instead, we’ll be looking at ways you can improve your emotional wellbeing while on lockdown, and why staying at home is the best possible thing you can do right now. And if you really must look at Covid-19 news, a good place to start is this datapack from Information Is Beautiful.

1. Staying at home keeps you, and everyone around you, safer

Don’t look at this as being forced to stay inside. Reframe your perspective and see the lockdown as a way to avoid exposing yourself and your loved ones to the virus. If you’re home and following proper sanitisation procedures (washing your hands to whatever song floats your boat, regularly disinfecting surfaces and objects like your phone), it’s much less likely you’ll catch the virus or risk spreading it to anyone else outside your household. There’s an end goal in sight – we’re collectively trying to flatten the curve and keep the rate of infection (R0) lower than 1 (i.e., each infected person infects fewer than one other person.

Graph showing the effect of flattening the curve – this is what a lockdown is designed to achieve. From Information Is Beautiful.

2. Boost your emotional wellbeing by staying social

Loneliness and social isolation can have serious negative impacts on health and emotional wellbeing and many of us get most of our social interaction through the workplace or in school. Even though we may not be physically in the same room, the internet and messaging apps have given us all the tools we need to talk to people. You don’t need to use conferencing apps like Zoom just for work – grab yourself a cup of tea and some biscuits and settle in for a conference-call chat with your friends.

Even if you don’t have the bandwidth to video call people, make sure to check in with friends at least once every day – it’s likely they’re feeling just as stressed out by all of this as you are.

3. Give yourself a break from social media

Yes, we just told you to be more social. But that doesn’t include checking Twitter three hundred times a day. Misinformation about the virus is being shared everywhere, along with a constant stream of news broadcasts telling you things that are guaranteed to stress you out. Turn your social media notifications off, remove the apps from your phone, and put your phone out of reach. If you don’t want to stay away from social media completely, maybe take a look at who you follow and see if you can keep your feed stress-free.

4. Ditch the alarm clock

When was the last time you had a really good night’s sleep, and spent the whole day feeling energised? Sleep deprivation is bad for your emotional wellbeing. Really bad. It’s not clear how many people worldwide are sleep-deprived, but it’s probably a lot. There’s a fairly simple solution, and now we’re on lockdown it’s the perfect time to try it out:

Ditch your alarm.

Stop setting it.

Unless you have somewhere to be (let’s face it: unlikely) or an urgent deadline, try letting your body tell you when to wake up. The caveat is that you should probably try to go to sleep before midnight, otherwise you’ll probably find yourself sleeping well into the next day. Try it – you might be surprised at how quickly your body adapts to a good sleep rhythm.

5. Get a plant to look after

Houseplants are all the rage right now, but they’re not just good for brightening up your Insta feed. Gardening is surprisingly good for your mental health and emotional wellbeing. In fact, the Royal Horticultural Society has made gardening and mental health a key part of it’s science strategy. They’ve created four new Wellbeing Gardens around the National Centre for Horticultural Science. You can visit just as soon as the gardens are reopened. In the meantime why not pick up a houseplant next time you’re in the supermarket stocking up on toilet roll?

Houseplants are an easy way to improve your emotional wellbeing.

6. Pick up a home project you’ve been putting off

It doesn’t have to be a huge task. It can be as simple as emptying out that junk drawer that things disappear into, but never seem to come out of. Doing something that makes your life slightly easier in the long run will make you feel more productive. Plus, it helps stave off any feelings of lethargy that you might experience being inside for long periods without a clear schedule.

7. Get creative with your cooking

It’s easy to start mindlessly snacking when you’re home for long periods of time. This is probably not very good for you for a couple of reasons. One, eating unhealthy food is linked to increased stress, anxiety, and depression ( and you’re likely to consume more of it). Two, although you can go to supermarkets, you need to limit your trips there as much as possible. Social distancing!

Plenty of people are talking about what to do with those random tins you have at the back of the cupboard. A good place to start is Twitter, where chef and food writer Jack Monroe runs #JackMonroesLockdownLarder every night from 5pm.

8. Read a book

Bibliotherapy isn’t a hugely well-studied field, but storytelling has been around for millennia. Reading is an easy way to escape for a little while. With the lockdown in place, now is the time to get through your ‘to-be-read’ list. Services like Kindle, Google Play and Apple Books have ebooks you can buy if you can’t get hold of physical books. But did you know in the UK many libraries offer apps where you can loan free ebooks? You can use this postcode checker to see what services your local library has to offer.

Reading through a stack of books, an easy way to boost emotional wellbeing.
Work through that pile of books you’ve been meaning to read

9. Improve your emotional wellbeing by getting outside

Yes, we’re on lockdown. You’re still allowed outside once a day for exercise though – the important thing is to be smart about it. Find the quiet places in your local area. Even if it’s just a walk round the block, countless studies show the importance of getting some exercise every day. Trying to spend a little bit of your day in nature is good for you, too. Sensible precautions apply – if you’re showing symptoms or you’ve come into contact with someone who has, you should stay inside. Even if you can’t get outside every day, opening the windows will get some air moving in your house. It’s a good way to take advantage of the improved air quality in many cities – a result of the lockdown.

A view of a gorse common. Getting outside is great for you emotional wellbeing.
You can still go outside for some exercise – see if you can find some hidden gems close to home
COVID-19 Health

Pandemic COVID-19: What do we have to fear?

This post is by Jennifer Cole PhD, a full-time Research Fellow at Royal Holloway, University of London. She is an Associate Fellow at the Royal United Institute for Defence and Security Studies, a UK-based policy think tank, where she ran the Resilience and Emergency Planning programme until 2018. She has also worked with UK and international government agencies on policy planning around the response to serious infectious disease outbreaks. Find her Reddit AMA on the COVID-19 pandemic here.

When people use the word ‘pandemic’ it tends to incite fear. It conjures up pictures of widespread death and societal collapse, the Hollywood movie version of what would happen and how the world would(n’t) cope with a new, unknown disease. History lessons of the Plague of Athens, the Black Death and, more recently, Spanish Flu bubble to the surface of collective and cultural memory. Millions of deaths. Bodies piling up in the streets. Society breaking down. 

But take a deep breath (through an N95 respirator mask if you want to be careful), step back and try not to panic. Even if the worst case prediction of case fatality ratescurrently running at around 2% turn out to be true – and it is increasingly looking as if this is a high-end estimate that doesn’t take into account the many cases that go unreported because symptoms are mild – there is no reason to think that this will equate to societal and economic collapse; the 1918-19 influenza outbreak had a similar CFR but didn’t, even in a world already economically depleted by WWI . There are currently 7.6 billion people in the world: even 2% less than that is still a lot more than 7 billion. The world won’t lose all its doctors, or airline pilots, or software developers, or rap artists. 

Pandemics and societal change

Pandemics with much higher CFRs – 30-60% – were needed to bring about real societal change. The UK’s medieval system of serfdom – essentially slavery to the landowners – was broken by a shortage of workers, meaning those who were available were able to negotiate better terms for their labour. Gandhi first rose to prominence by helping Indian clothworkers to demand better working conditions following similar labour shortages that resulted from an outbreak of Bubonic Plague in India in the early 20th century.

Society did anything but descend into chaos on either occasion: the affected communities came out stronger and more just. Neither is collapse likely with SARS-Cov2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 outbreak. This isn’t to play down the situation. It isn’t to belittle the virus as ‘just a cold’ or to not care about the people who have died and will still die. But it is a call to keep things in perspective, to guard against panic, and to consider what part everyone has to play in responding to events over the coming weeks. 

Vector graphic showing COVID-19 viruses. They appear to be spreading, pandemic-like across the image

What is a pandemic, and are all pandemics deadly?

So is SARS-Cov2 a disaster? A death sentence for the world? The end of civilisation as we know it? The evidence is increasingly saying ‘no’. Pandemics have, in the past, been all those things but at the same time, all ‘pandemic’ means in literal terms – ‘pan (all) and demos (people)’ – is ‘everywhere in the world’. It denotes the geographic range of the spread, not severity of the disease, but tends to be interpreted by lay audiences as the latter only. This is precisely why the WHO revised how they used the term following the 2009-10 H1NI ‘Swine Flu’ pandemic: when the virus responsible turned out to cause only mild disease in most cases, they were criticised for over-reacting and of encouraging countries to ramp up unnecessary countermeasures.

The media prefer to hear about PHEICs – Public Health Emergencies of International Concern – because they’re easier to make headlines out of. Emergency! Concern! even though PHEICs may not be everywhere or much of a threat to most people other than the ones whose job it is to deal with them. Anyone remember the Polio PHIEC of 2014? It didn’t spark sensational headlines because the world has a vaccine. The fact that the vaccination programme had broken down in war-torn Syria, putting thousands of Syrian children at risk – but no-one else – wasn’t a good enough story.

Ebola, which was happening at the same time, got much more attention. There was more of a threat from a disease that didn’t have a vaccine – although, as it turned out, even that threat was reasonably easily mitigated by any quarter-decent healthcare system. A few years before, Swine Flu had made the headlines when people who don’t usually die if they catch influenza thought they might, but everyone then lost interest when they realised that this wasn’t the case. At the same time, the papers forgot that more than 600,000 people die each year from normal seasonal fluup to 10,000 in the UK alone. This is also pandemic, but no-one really worries too much about it.

So how does all this relate to coronavirus SARS-CoV2? Should we be scared that (a) it’s a PHEIC and (b) that it may or not be ‘officially’ a pandemic depending on whose classification is used and how that classification is made? 

A COVID-19 pandemic: should we panic now?

The key to how scared someone should be of a disease is, of course, how likely they are to be affected by it. Primarily, how likely they are to die if they catch it. This, in turn, depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited to: [1] how susceptible they are to catching the disease, [2] how able to naturally (without any medical help) fight it off if they are infected, [3] how much, and what, medical help is available if they can’t fight it off without medical intervention, [4] how measures including quarantine and vaccination offer protection [5] and what can be done to avoid catching it, which includes everything from handwashing, using a face mask, to self-isolating and quarantine. PHEICs drive international cooperation. Pandemics encourage rapid research and vaccine development, bring greater and more immediate investment, galvanise the research community to work together and lead to greater understanding of not only the disease itself, but of how best to organise healthcare systems and response. Not all of it is bad news.

Vector graphic showing a network of people wearing face masks, surrounding one person who is not wearing a mask and who appears to be infected with coronavirus, the disease responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic.

So, let’s deal with each of the factors mentioned above in turn:

1. How likely am I to get COVID-19?

In the case of SARS-Cov2, the current planning assumptions are still that everyone is susceptible to catching it. That no-one has any innate immunity (obtained from having caught it once before, when they may have been younger and fitter and more able to fight it off). There may be little genetic immunity (which can exist within a society because people who are less able to fight it off don’t survive to breed) because it hasn’t been around long enough for this selective pressure to come into play.

Equally, however, there may be – some people were naturally immune to Ebola because they carried an allele known as CCR5 Delta-32– which also offers protection against HIV. General virus-fighting biology may be working behind the scenes but it takes a long time for scientists to figure this out – with Ebola, it was deduced from analysing family members who had all been exposed but not all of them became infected – but things have so far been happening very, very quickly with SARS-Cov2; too quickly for such analyses to be made.

The cruise ships are the best microcosm we have to deduce how many people who have clearly been at risk don’t become infected. More time will be needed to develop a clearer picture on this but out of 3711 crew and passengers, only around one in five seems to have contracted the disease. 

2. How serious are the symptoms?

A second factor in how badly the virus will affect society is how likely the average person who contracts it will be to require hospital treatment. This is particularly difficult to calculate from early cases as mild and asymptomatic ones will not be recorded. Only the severe cases tend to be diagnosed – possibly only those who go on to need hospitalisation – show up in the figures. It seems that many people either didn’t realise they were infected or had such mild symptoms they didn’t go to a doctor. It was indeed, ‘just a cold’ for them. Here, again, the cruise ships will provide some of the most accurate numbers available, as will contact-tracing relatives of known cases and people who are known to be at risk of exposure.

Normally, healthy people aren’t tested for cold or flu viruses or recorded in medical records, and thus severity and case fatality rates tend to be overestimated at first, and drop as more figures become available. Now that significant numbers of people are being tested – whether they’re ill or not, and whether they’re mildly or significantly ill – the real picture will become clearer, as will info on what types of people are more likely to be severely ill than mildly ill: the very elderly, those with underlying health conditions, heavy smokers etc. Once demographics have been established, people outside of those categories can worry a bit less. Early indications so far suggest that the risk of dying if one contracts the virus is around 14% for people over 80, but only 0.2% for those under 40. 

3. Can we treat COVID-19?

Medical help is available, and paints a reasonably optimistic picture. Dealing severe respiratory conditions is a staple of hospital operations: there’s lots of equipment and trained nurses and doctors. If you end up in hospital, they know what to do. The real challenge with SARS-Cov2 is that there will be more people than usual in hospital at the same time. Mostly old, already ill with other conditions, or immunocompromised people – but still more. Remember the accusations that Swine Flu was a bit of crying wolf? The NHS doesn’t – the UK’s healthcare sector only barely coped. Still, it did – due to years of planning, exercising and preparation. People died, but not that many more than in an average flu season.

The biggest concern with SARS-Cov2 is that high numbers of severe cases – quantity rather than quality of disease – will result in not enough of this medical help to go round. This is probably the biggest real concern in the current situation. It’s why one of China’s first actions was to build the massive temporary hospitals, why the US’s FEMA is sending out letters requisitioning hotel beds, and why in most countries, emergency plans will be kicking in to do the same and to see what other things hospital beds are used for – such as routine hip replacements, for example – can be postponed for a few months.

In the meantime, quarantines, social distancing and encouraged self-isolation will help to protect these elderly and vulnerable members of the population, as well as those who could probably fight it off alone. This doesn’t mean that quarantines, lockdowns and self-isolation is an over- or knee-jerk reaction – but rather than only benefitting the quarantined individual, they buy time: to understand the virus better, to learn how to deal with it, to calculate more accurate figures for how infectious it is and the case fatality rate it causes, and how to prevent it. 

4. Can we vaccinate against COVID-19?

One main advantage of quarantines, lockdowns and curfews is that they buy time: for healthcare professionals and scientists to figure out how best to deal with the disease and, ideally, they buy time in which vaccines can be developed and trialled. Even if and when it’s completely understood that containment measures cannot keep a disease from spreading and becoming pandemic for ever, it is still worth slowing that spread down – as much as possible, for as long as possible. This is the best response for society at a mass level – but has to be weighed against the damage quarantines may cause, such as panicking people, and damaging the economy.

The alternative is to let the virus run and take the consequences – potentially sacrificing the elderly and vulnerable for whom there may not be enough healthcare.  It would take a very, very brave politician to make that call. The politically safer (and more human) option is to keep plugging away with the quarantines even when you know they will ultimately fail to contain the spread. 

5. How do I avoid catching it in a pandemic?

At a societal level, however, there is still much we can do. Human behaviour is an important factor in disease spread as the characteristics of the pathogen itself and everything from basic handwashing, not coughing on your neighbours, working from home if possible and shopping online for groceries, will have a significant impact on whether you personally catch the disease and whether the chains of infection across the world can be broken. Emergency planning scenarios tend not to like to focus so much on human factors, as they’re harder to control, but once factored in, they make the whole situation much, much less scary. 

Vector graphic of a bar of soap overlaid on a blue background that looks like splashing water. Washing your hands with soap is one of the easiest ways to keep yourself safe in this pandemic.
Washing your hands with soap is one of the most effective ways to sanitise them. Hand sanitiser gel will also work if soap isn’t available – it’s not just effective on bacteria!

How prepared are we for a pandemic?

Knowing the amount of planning that goes into how the world will deal with a situation like SARS-Cov2 can also provide reassurance that society is far from collapse. Not just in terms of how the medical sector will deal with so many additional hospitalisations, but how supply chains will be kept running, how pharmaceutical production can be ramped up quickly, and many, many other aspects.

The vast majority of these plans have been publicly available for years but the irony is, the public mostly ignores them and even sneers at them until the crisis hits. But they’re there, and people are working behind the scenes right now – just as they always are – to make sure that they hold up as well as possible under very trying circumstances. A massive help to how well they can operate is making sure the public doesn’t panic – that people take avoidance measures where necessary but don’t get overly worried about what they can’t change. Society will only break down if society allows it to. 

So we’ll get through this pandemic?

It is important to keep things in perspective. ‘Pandemic’ refers to the number of cases and the number of countries a disease is spreading freely in, not its severity. If and when SARS-Cov2 becomes pandemic, this doesn’t mean it’s more or less infectious/serious/scary than it was last week. It means that countries and their healthcare sectors are more alert to it, more likely to reach for, assess and amend where necessary their own emergency plans to deal with it. This includes how they will cope with more hospitalizations, what additional supplies they need to start drawing in and how they reorganise to manage something beyond business as usual. Swine flu is recent enough that plans have been tested within living memory, and they did hold up.

Pandemics have the greatest effect at a societal level

For those still feeling that the best response is to panic: keep in perspective the difference between risks to individuals and risks to society. The longer outbreaks go on, the more information emerges about them. The more SARS-Cov2 cases are understood, and the more information and understanding is gained about asymptomatic or very mildly symptomatic cases, the more it looks as if, on an individual level, the virus may not be too much worse than a typical seasonal flu season for the majority of people under 80.

At population level, this is still a significant challenge because – unlike the viruses that circulate during a typical flu season – no one has any immunity to SARS-Cov2, so overall there will be many more cases. The people least likely to be able to fight it off – the elderly – won’t be protected by residual immunity from other viruses that were similar enough to the current one to help. In the 2009 Swine Flu epidemic, residual immunity to the Asian flu(s) of the late 50s and 60s meant that the elderly had some protection. That’s not there this time. But, if you aren’t elderly, don’t have an underlying immune condition and seek treatment early, it is looking increasingly as though you are likely to survive infection, without needing hospital treatment..

The picture is somewhat different for those who work in the health system, who are likely to face significantly increased workloads. But preparedness plans (all publicly available online) are in place and the doctors who know about them tend to be playing down the dangers

Quarantines are a good thing

It’s also important to acknowledge that the quarantines and lockdowns in place across the world look dramatic on TV but are there primarily to slow down the spread of virus, which has two main advantages:

1.     If the spread is slower, an outbreak in one area might be more or less over before another one starts. Resources can be moved around and go further if the entire world doesn’t have to deal with all cases there will ever be at once. In particular, once an outbreak has passed through one region, it tends to leave behind recovered and immune survivors who can help those who come after them. 

2.     Secondly, the slower the spread goes, the more time there is for vaccine development, to protect those in regions not yet affected. The world’s vaccine developers are working round the clock to make sure this happens: a vaccine may be ready for early human trials in April [30]. 

The scenario presented above isn’t the sensationalised doom-mongering that makes the best tabloid headines. Nor is it looking at the challenge through rose-tinted glasses. Panic never solved anything; the best approach to any crisis is to be well-informed, well-prepared and ready to meet it head on. The young(ish) and generally healthy will mostly survive. By doing what we can to avoid catching the virus and passing it on, everyone can help to protect those who are older and less generally healthy.  By aiming to be part of the solution, not the problem, we all have has a part to play in keeping society in the best health possible over the coming weeks.