The feasibility of non-pharmacological public health interventions (NPIs) such as physical distancing or isolation at home to prevent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in low-resource countries is unknown. Household survey data from 54 African countries were used to investigate the feasibility of SARS-CoV-2 NPIs in low-resource settings. Across the 54 countries, approximately 718 million people lived in households with ⩾6 individuals at home (median percentage of at-risk households 56% (95% confidence interval (CI), 51% to 60%)). Approximately 283 million people lived in households where ⩾3 people slept in a single room (median percentage of at-risk households 15% (95% CI, 13% to 19%)). An estimated 890 million Africans lack on-site water (71% (95% CI, 62% to 80%)), while 700 million people lacked in-home soap/washing facilities (56% (95% CI, 42% to 73%)). The median percentage of people without a refrigerator in the home was 79% (95% CI, 67% to 88%), while 45% (95% CI, 39% to 52%) shared toilet facilities with other households. Individuals in low-resource settings have substantial obstacles to implementing NPIs for mitigating SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These populations urgently need to be prioritised for coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination to prevent disease and to contain the global pandemic.

The response to the novel coronavirus outbreak in China suggests that many of the lessons from the 2003 SARS epidemic have been implemented and the response improved as a consequence. Nevertheless some questions remain and not all lessons have been successful. The national and international response demonstrates the complex link between public health, science and politics when an outbreak threatens to impact on global economies and reputations. The unprecedented measures implemented in China are a bold attempt to control the outbreak – we need to understand their effectiveness to balance costs and benefits for similar events in the future.

Syndromic surveillance is a form of surveillance that generates information for public health action by collecting, analysing and interpreting routine health-related data on symptoms and clinical signs reported by patients and clinicians rather than being based on microbiologically or clinically confirmed cases. In England, a suite of national real-time syndromic surveillance systems (SSS) have been developed over the last 20 years, utilising data from a variety of health care settings (a telehealth triage system, general practice and emergency departments). The real-time systems in England have been used for early detection (e.g. seasonal influenza), for situational awareness (e.g. describing the size and demographics of the impact of a heatwave) and for reassurance of lack of impact on population health of mass gatherings (e.g. the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games).We highlight the lessons learnt from running SSS, for nearly two decades, and propose questions and issues still to be addressed. We feel that syndromic surveillance is an example of the use of ‘big data’, but contend that the focus for sustainable and useful systems should be on the added value of such systems and the importance of people working together to maximise the value for the public health of syndromic surveillance services.