Is, or was, anyone actually saying anything that amounted to “we are safe, therefore precautions are unnecessary”? What I’ve heard people saying is more like “we are safe enough with our current level of precautions, therefore such-and-such an extra precaution is unnecessary”.
This has the Chesterton’s post problem. What do you mean by “our current level of precautions”? Do they include the existing provisions for quarantine in case of emergencies?
They include whatever is being done now. Which appears to be something like: don’t try to block or delay entry from affected countries wholesale; get people arriving from places affected by Ebola to monitor themselves for a while after travelling and take appropriate action if they suspect infection; etc.
This all seems to be working OK.
Of course the situation could change in ways that justified large-scale quarantining, but I’m not aware of any reason to expect that it will.
This has the Chesterton’s post problem. What do you mean by “our current level of precautions”? Do they include the existing provisions for quarantine in case of emergencies?
They include whatever is being done now. Which appears to be something like: don’t try to block or delay entry from affected countries wholesale; get people arriving from places affected by Ebola to monitor themselves for a while after travelling and take appropriate action if they suspect infection; etc.
This all seems to be working OK.
Of course the situation could change in ways that justified large-scale quarantining, but I’m not aware of any reason to expect that it will.