At a Chinese-organised press conference on Saturday, World Health Organisation (WHO) experts fielded questions from state media obsessed with one issue: Could it be confirmed that atypical pneumonia had originated in Guangdong province?
Team leader Robert Breiman had already said clearly that there was no evidence to prove where the illness had originated. So, he was bemused when the same question was posed again, by a reporter fluent enough in English to pass for a native speaker. Mr Breiman turned to his colleagues for help, but they did not think he had to repeat himself.
The question appeared yet again, after the press conference. German virologist Wolfgang Preiser, the most media-shy of the experts, could not help but rescue team member Alan Schnur. 'That question has been asked for the third time,' he said, putting a stop to the harassment.
Tracing the origin of a new virus can give a clue to how rapidly it is likely to spread elsewhere. So it is important to epidemiologists, but not vital. Why, then, is China so obsessed with finding where it first appeared? It seems incomprehensible. The first reported case of atypical pneumonia was a 47-year old village chief in Foshan, but that does not necessarily mean it originated there. Aids first broke out in the US but was later found to have originated in Africa.
In 1999, a new virus jumped the species barrier, infected pig breeders and decimated the pig industry in Malaysia. Five million pigs were slaughtered in the attempt to control the outbreak. That virus was named Nipah after the village where it was found. So, even if Sars did originate in Foshan, does it matter if there is a new illness called Foshan flu?
Viruses do not target a specific group of people, and it does not reflect badly on a country that a new virus has emerged there.
