That increases other (personal) risks. However, it answers the original question—though not quite correctly, it does not quite minimize the risk of infection—if you accept increasing other risks as a price for decreasing Ebola-risk, there are (much) more dangerous places to go camping, with (much) less Ebola risk (e.g. abandoned underground salt mine). If you accept increasing other risks beyond any reasonable limits, then the answer (which you might very well get from an optimizing AI) is very simple—shoot yourself. Future risk of Ebola infection—zero :-)
That increases other (personal) risks. However, it answers the original question—though not quite correctly, it does not quite minimize the risk of infection—if you accept increasing other risks as a price for decreasing Ebola-risk, there are (much) more dangerous places to go camping, with (much) less Ebola risk (e.g. abandoned underground salt mine). If you accept increasing other risks beyond any reasonable limits, then the answer (which you might very well get from an optimizing AI) is very simple—shoot yourself. Future risk of Ebola infection—zero :-)