On 20th January the Chinese authorities recanted their false claim, the virus would not be transmitted by humans. But on 30th January the WHO nevertheless did not yet "recommend any travel or trade restriction" despite her novel intelligence "There has been human-to-human transmission in 3 countries outside China. One of these cases is severe and there have been no deaths.", and the WHO-committee disagreed when to meet next time because it was in doubt about the pandemic character of the virus: "At that time, the advice was that the event did not constitute a PHEIC," <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)" rel="noreferrer nofollow">Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)</a> 30 January 2020 Statement Geneva, Switzerland

<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tedros-Letter.pdf" rel="noreferrer nofollow">THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON May 18, 2020</a> Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus Director-General of the World Health Organization Geneva, Switzerland Dear Dr. Tedros: ...... The International Health Regulations require countries to report the risk of a health emergency within 24 hours. But China did not inform the World Health Organization of Wuhan's several cases of pneumonia, of unknown origin, until December 31, 2019, even though it likely had knowledge of these cases days or weeks earlier. • According to Dr. Zhang Yongzhen of the Shanghai Public Health Clinic Center, he told Chinese authorities on January 5, 2020, that he had sequenced the genome of the virus. There was no publication of this information until six days later, on January 11, 2020, when Dr. Zhang self-posted it online. The next day, Chinese authorities closed his lab for "rectification." As even the World Health Organization acknowledged, Dr. Zhang's posting was a great act of "transparency." But the World Health Organization has been conspicuously silent both with respect to the closure of Dr. Zhang' s lab and his assertion that he had notified Chinese authorities of his breakthrough six days earlier. • The World Health Organization has repeatedly made claims about the coronavirus that were either grossly inaccurate or misleading. • On January 14, 2020, the World Health Organization gratuitously reaffirmed China's now-debunked claim that the coronavirus could not be transmitted between humans, stating: "Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCov) identified in Wuhan, China." This assertion was in direct conflict with censored reports from Wuhan. • On January 21, 2020, President Xi Jinping of China reportedly pressured you not to declare the coronavirus outbreak an emergency. You gave in to this pressure the next day and told the world that the coronavirus did not pose a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Just over one week later, on January 30, 2020, overwhelming evidence to the contrary forced you to reverse course. • On January 28, 2020, after meeting with President Xi in Beijing, you praised the Chinese government for its "transparency" with respect to the coronavirus, announcing that China had set a "new standard for outbreak control" and "boughtthe world time." You did not mention that China had, by then, silenced or punished several doctors for speaking out about the virus and restricted Chinese institutions from publishing information about it. • Even after you belatedly declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern on January 30, 2020, you failed to press China for the timely admittance of a World Health Organization team of international medical experts. As a result, this critical team did not arrive in China until two weeks later, on February 16, 2020. And even then, the team was not allowed to visit Wuhan until the final days of their visit. Remarkably, the World Health Organization was silent when China denied the two American members of the team access to Wuhan entirely. • You also strongly praised China's strict domestic travel restrictions, but were inexplicably against my closing of the United States border, or the ban, with respect to people coming from China. I put the ban in place regardless of your wishes. Your political gamesmanship on this issue was deadly, as other governments, relying on your. ....... <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tedros-Letter.pdf" rel="noreferrer nofollow">www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Tedros-Lett...</a>

<a href="http://www.msn.com/de-de/nachrichten/politik/china-soll-daten-zu-coronavirus-tagelang-zur%c3%bcckgehalten-haben/ar-BB14Yd8O" rel="noreferrer nofollow">China soll Daten zu Coronavirus tagelang zurückgehalten haben</a> 3.Juni 2020. Die Welt.

China hat essenzielle Informationen über das neuartige Coronavirus mehr als eine Woche lang zurückgehalten. Die Nachrichtenagentur AP hat dazu interne Dokumente und E-Mails ausgewertet und zahlreiche Interviews geführt. Demnach besaßen die chinesischen Behörden über Tage hinweg bereits detailliertes Wissen über den genetischen Code des Virus – Wissen, mit dem Tests, Medikamente und Impfstoffe entwickelt werden können.

Den Recherchen zufolge wurden Informationen über den neuen Krankheitserreger streng kontrolliert, auch weil private und staatliche Labore miteinander konkurrierten. Während die Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) China noch öffentlich für dessen Hilfe und die „umgehende“ Veröffentlichung des genetischen Codes lobte, gab es WHO-intern schon Sorgen, dass das Land nicht genügend Informationen über die Risiken des neuen Virus teilte und damit wertvolle Zeit verspielte.

„Wir sind jetzt an dem Punkt, wo wir 15 Minuten, bevor CCTV berichtet, Bescheid bekommen“, sagte der oberste WHO-Repräsentant in China, Gauden Galea, in einem internen Treffen, das aufgezeichnet wurde. CCTV ist der staatliche Sender China Central Television. Die WHO muss sich, was gesundheitliche Informationen betrifft, auf die Mitgliedstaaten verlassen. Internationales Recht verpflichtet diese zwar zur Meldung relevanter Daten, doch hat die WHO keine Mittel, das auch durchzusetzen.

Das neue Coronavirus wurde erstmals am 2. Januar decodiert, am 30. Januar erklärte die WHO den weltweiten Notstand. In der Zwischenzeit breitete sich das Virus um das 100- bis 200-Fache aus, wie rückblickende Daten des Chinesischen Zentrums für Krankheitskontrolle und -Prävention zeigen. Die WHO und die in diesem Text genannten Funktionäre wollten nicht Stellung nehmen, ohne die Aufnahmen oder Transkripte der aufgezeichneten Treffen einzusehen. Diese hat die Nachrichtenagentur AP nicht weitergegeben, um ihre Quellen zu schützen.

Für die WHO kommen diese Enthüllungen zur Unzeit, nachdem US-Präsident Donald Trump am Freitag die Zusammenarbeit der USA mit der UN-Gesundheitsorganisation aufgekündigt hat. Sein Vorwurf: Die WHO habe mit China zusammengearbeitet, um das Ausmaß der Epidemie zu verschleiern. Chinas Präsident Xi Jinping hielt dagegen, sein Land habe immer Informationen an die WHO und die Welt geliefert, und zwar in kürzester Zeit. Nach Informationen von AP stimmt weder das eine noch das andere.

Mehr von Microsoft News: Schwedens Corona-Weg: Zu viele sind zu früh gestorben (WELT) Warum Masken auch zu Hause sinnvoll sind (SZ.de)

Vielmehr zeigt sich, wie sehr die WHO irgendwo dazwischen gefangen war, während sie eindringlich nach mehr Daten verlangte. Sie wurde von China größtenteils im Unklaren gelassen und erhielt nur ein Mindestmaß an Informationen. Dennoch versuchte die WHO, China im besten Licht erscheinen zu lassen, wahrscheinlich, um das Land zur Herausgabe von mehr Details zu bewegen. WHO-Funktionäre fragten sich, wie sie China unter Druck setzen könnten, ohne dabei die chinesischen Behörden zu verärgern oder Wissenschaftler zu gefährden.

„Unsere Führungskräfte und Mitarbeiter haben Tag und Nacht gearbeitet, um alle Mitgliedstaaten gleichermaßen zu unterstützen und mit Daten zu versorgen“, teilte die WHO mit. Die Kommunikation mit den Regierungen sei offen und ehrlich gewesen. Keinen Kommentar dagegen gab es von der chinesischen Gesundheitskommission und dem Außenministerium. Doch hat das Land in den vergangenen Monaten wiederholt seine Maßnahmen verteidigt, während andere Länder – auch die USA – teilweise noch deutlich länger als China benötigten, um auf das Virus zu reagieren.

Ende Dezember 2019 fiel Ärzten erstmals auf, dass Patienten an einer ungewöhnlichen Lungenentzündung erkrankten. Sie baten kommerzielle Labore um Hilfe. Bis zum 27. Dezember hatte ein Unternehmen, Vision Medicals, den genetischen Code eines neuartigen Virus größtenteils entziffert, das auffallende Ähnlichkeiten mit Sars besaß. Es ging eine Meldung an die Behörden in Wuhan hinaus, die Tage später eine interne Warnung vor der ungewöhnlichen Lungenentzündung aussprachen.

Am 30. Dezember wurde die renommierte Coronavirus-Expertin Shi Zhengli am Virologischen Institut Wuhan auf die Krankheit aufmerksam gemacht. Am 2. Januar hatte ihr Team das Virus komplett entschlüsselt. Und von da an lief es schief: Chinas oberste Gesundheitsbehörde – die Nationale Gesundheitskommission – gab eine vertrauliche Anweisung, die es Laboren verbot, ohne Erlaubnis über das Virus zu berichten.

„Wahrscheinlich ansteckend“

Bis zum 5. Januar hatten zwei staatliche Labore und das Labor von Professor Zhang Yongzhen in Shanghai das Virus entschlüsselt. Zhang warnte die Gesundheitskommission, dass das Virus „wahrscheinlich ansteckend“ sei. Doch die Öffentlichkeit wurde immer noch nicht informiert. Überall in der Region tauchten Verdachtsfälle auf. In Thailand nahmen Flughafenbehörden eine Frau beiseite, die aus Wuhan kam und an Schnupfen, Halsschmerzen und Fieber litt. Wissenschaftler der Chulalongkorn-Universität in Bangkok fanden bald heraus, dass sie sich mit einem neuen Coronavirus angesteckt hatte, doch fehlte ihnen ein genetischer Code aus China, um es abzugleichen.

Auf internen Treffen der WHO regte sich derweil Unmut über China. Michael Ryan, WHO-Verantwortlicher für Notfälle, sagte, es sei an der Zeit, „den Gang zu wechseln“ und auf mehr Informationen zu drängen. Am 11. Januar schließlich veröffentlichte Professor Zhang in Shanghai den genetischen Code des Coronavirus, noch vor den Gesundheitsbehörden. Einen Tag später folgten das Chinesische Zentrum für Krankheitskontrolle und -Prävention, das Virologische Institut in Wuhan und die Chinesische Akademie der Medizinwissenschaften.

Am 20. Januar warnten die chinesischen Behörden davor, dass das Virus sich unter Menschen ausbreite. Die WHO entsandte ein kleines Team nach Wuhan. Besorgt über den neuen Erreger, reiste WHO-Chef Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus nach Peking. Am Ende seiner Reise entschied sich die WHO schließlich, am 30. Januar den weltweiten Notstand auszurufen. Tedros bedankte sich ausführlich bei China, ohne die vorherige Verärgerung der WHO zu erwähnen: „China hat bereits Unglaubliches geleistet, um die Übertragung des Virus auf andere Länder einzuschränken.“

30. Januar 2020:

<a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/30-01-2020-statement-on-the-second-meeting-of-the-international-health-regulations-(2005)-emergency-committee-regarding-the-outbreak-of-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)" rel="noreferrer nofollow">Statement on the second meeting of the International Health Regulations (2005) Emergency Committee regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV)</a> 30 January 2020 Statement Geneva, Switzerland

The second meeting of the Emergency Committee convened by the WHO Director-General under the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) regarding the outbreak of novel coronavirus 2019 in the People’s Republic of China, with exportations to other countries, took place on Thursday, 30 January 2020, from 13:30 to 18:35 Geneva time (CEST). The Committee’s role is to give advice to the Director-General, who makes the final decision on the determination of a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The Committee also provides public health advice or suggests formal Temporary Recommendations as appropriate.

Proceedings of the meeting Members and advisors of the Emergency Committee were convened by teleconference

The Director-General welcomed the Committee and thanked them for their support. He turned the meeting over to the Chair, Professor Didier Houssin.

Professor Houssin also welcomed the Committee and gave the floor to the Secretariat.

A representative of the department of compliance, risk management, and ethics briefed the Committee members on their roles and responsibilities.

Committee members were reminded of their duty of confidentiality and their responsibility to disclose personal, financial, or professional connections that might be seen to constitute a conflict of interest. Each member who was present was surveyed and no conflicts of interest were judged to be relevant to the meeting. There were no changes since the previous meeting.

The Chair then reviewed the agenda for the meeting and introduced the presenters.

Representatives of the Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China reported on the current situation and the public health measures being taken. There are now 7711 confirmed and 12167 suspected cases throughout the country. Of the confirmed cases, 1370 are severe and 170 people have died. 124 people have recovered and been discharged from hospital.

The WHO Secretariat provided an overview of the situation in other countries. There are now 83 cases in 18 countries. Of these, only 7 had no history of travel in China. There has been human-to-human transmission in 3 countries outside China. One of these cases is severe and there have been no deaths.

At its first meeting, the Committee expressed divergent views on whether this event constitutes a PHEIC or not. At that time, the advice was that the event did not constitute a PHEIC, but theCommittee members agreed on the urgency of the situation and suggested that the Committee should continue its meeting on the next day, when it reached the same conclusion.

This second meeting takes place in view of significant increases in numbers of cases and additional countries reporting confirmed cases.

Conclusions and advice The Committee welcomed the leadership and political commitment of the very highest levels of Chinese government, their commitment to transparency, and the efforts made to investigate and contain the current outbreak. China quickly identified the virus and shared its sequence, so that other countries could diagnose it quickly and protect themselves, which has resulted in the rapid development of diagnostic tools.

The very strong measures the country has taken include daily contact with WHO and comprehensive multi-sectoral approaches to prevent further spread. It has also taken public health measures in other cities and provinces; is conducting studies on the severity and transmissibility of the virus, and sharing data and biological material. The country has also agreed to work with other countries who need their support. The measures China has taken are good not only for that country but also for the rest of the world.

The Committee acknowledged the leading role of WHO and its partners.

The Committee also acknowledged that there are still many unknowns, cases have now been reported in five WHO regions in one month, and human-to-human transmission has occurred outside Wuhan and outside China.

The Committee believes that it is still possible to interrupt virus spread, provided that countries put in place strong measures to detect disease early, isolate and treat cases, trace contacts, and promote social distancing measures commensurate with the risk. It is important to note that as the situation continues to evolve, so will the strategic goals and measures to prevent and reduce spread of the infection. The Committee agreed that the outbreak now meets the criteria for a Public Health Emergency of International Concern and proposed the following advice to be issued as Temporary Recommendations.

The Committee emphasized that the declaration of a PHEIC should be seen in the spirit of support and appreciation for China, its people, and the actions China has taken on the frontlines of this outbreak, with transparency, and, it is to be hoped, with success. In line with the need for global solidarity, the Committee felt that a global coordinated effort is needed to enhance preparedness in other regions of the world that may need additional support for that.

Advice to WHO The Committee welcomed a forthcoming WHO multidisciplinary technical mission to China, including national and local experts. The mission should review and support efforts to investigate the animal source of the outbreak, the clinical spectrum of the disease and its severity, the extent of human-to-human transmission in the community and in healthcare facilities, and efforts to control the outbreak. This mission will provide information to the international community to aid in understanding the situation and its impact and enable sharing of experience and successful measures.

The Committee wished to re-emphasize the importance of studying the possible source, to rule out hidden transmission and to inform risk management measures

The Committee also emphasized the need for enhanced surveillance in regions outside Hubei, including pathogen genomic sequencing, to understand whether local cycles of transmission are occurring.

WHO should continue to use its networks of technical experts to assess how best this outbreak can be contained globally.

WHO should provide intensified support for preparation and response, especially in vulnerable countries and regions.

Measures to ensure rapid development and access to potential vaccines, diagnostics, antiviral medicines and other therapeutics for low- and middle-income countries should be developed.

WHO should continue to provide all necessary technical and operational support to respond to this outbreak, including with its extensive networks of partners and collaborating institutions, to implement a comprehensive risk communication strategy, and to allow for the advancement of research and scientific developments in relation to this novel coronavirus.

WHO should continue to explore the advisability of creating an intermediate level of alert between the binary possibilities of PHEIC or no PHEIC, in a way that does not require reopening negotiations on the text of the IHR (2005).

WHO should timely review the situation with transparency and update its evidence-based recommendations.

The Committee does not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on the current information available.

The Director-General declared that the outbreak of 2019-nCoV constitutes a PHEIC and accepted the Committee’s advice and issued this advice as Temporary Recommendations under the IHR.

To the People’s Republic of China Continue to:

• Implement a comprehensive risk communication strategy to regularly inform the population on the evolution of the outbreak, the prevention and protection measures for the population, and the response measures taken for its containment.

• Enhance public health measures for containment of the current outbreak.

• Ensure the resilience of the health system and protect the health workforce.

• Enhance surveillance and active case finding across China.

• Collaborate with WHO and partners to conduct investigations to understand the epidemiology and the evolution of this outbreak and measures to contain it.

• Share relevant data on human cases.

• Continue to identify the zoonotic source of the outbreak, and particularly the potential for circulation with WHO as soon as it becomes available.

• Conduct exit screening at international airports and ports, with the aim of early detection of symptomatic travelers for further evaluation and treatment, while minimizing interference with international traffic.

To all countries It is expected that further international exportation of cases may appear in any country. Thus, all countries should be prepared for containment, including active surveillance, early detection, isolation and case management, contact tracing and prevention of onward spread of 2019-nCoVinfection, and to share full data with WHO. Technical advice is available on the WHO website.

Countries are reminded that they are legally required to share information with WHO under the IHR.

Any detection of 2019-nCoV in an animal (including information about the species, diagnostic tests, and relevant epidemiological information) should be reported to the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) as an emerging disease.

Countries should place particular emphasis on reducing human infection, prevention of secondary transmission and international spread, and contributing to the international response though multi-sectoral communication and collaboration and active participation in increasing knowledge on the virus and the disease, as well as advancing research.

The Committee does not recommend any travel or trade restriction based on the current information available.

Countries must inform WHO about travel measures taken, as required by the IHR. Countries are cautioned against actions that promote stigma or discrimination, in line with the principles of Article 3 of the IHR.

The Committee asked the Director-General to provide further advice on these matters and, if necessary, to make new case-by-case recommendations, in view of this rapidly evolving situation.

To the global community As this is a new coronavirus, and it has been previously shown that similar coronaviruses required substantial efforts to enable regular information sharing and research, the global community should continue to demonstrate solidarity and cooperation, in compliance with Article 44 of the IHR (2005), in supporting each other on the identification of the source of this new virus, its full potential for human-to-human transmission, preparedness for potential importation of cases, and research for developing necessary treatment.

Provide support to low- and middle-income countries to enable their response to this event, as well as to facilitate access to diagnostics, potential vaccines and therapeutics.

Under Article 43 of the IHR, States Parties implementing additional health measures that significantly interfere with international traffic (refusal of entry or departure of international travellers, baggage, cargo, containers, conveyances, goods, and the like, or their delay, for more than 24 hours) are obliged to send to WHO the public health rationale and justification within 48 hours of their implementation. WHO will review the justification and may request countries to reconsider their measures. WHO is required to share with other States Parties the information about measures and the justification received.

The Emergency Committee will be reconvened within three months or earlier, at the discretion of the Director-General.