And I'm supposed to believe them when they say "not very large"?
He’s not saying anything they have not said before. Why do you think we are screening incoming passengers?
39 years ago these outbreaks were in undeveloped areas of the Congo and elsewhere in west Africa. This last and current event occurred in a area that has more access to transportation then they did 39 years ago. Add to this that more and more outsiders are living or working with NGO’s in these areas, thus they travel back to their home countries, usually by air now.
It is quite conceivable, therefore that someone could get through screening with no symptoms and subsequently show those symptoms after arriving at home or where ever they went within the continental US.
So yeah, for all the reasons I stated above, and several more, a Ebola infection in the US is numerically inevitable.
But I note that he did not say that it would be followed by a outbreak of the disease!
In fact, he shot that idea down, as he should because it’s true. Any infection here would have to remain isolated because of out awareness and infrastructure. As it often does in other developed countries when and if it occurs.
Just had one in Saudi Arabia...It would be the same here.
The risk of having someone infected manage to get into the US is pretty high, probably 100% over time.
But the risk that this would pose to us in regard to a uncontrolled outbreak in a population is very, very low, not zero, because nothing ever is, but very, very low.
It's "impossible"...that it will be "not very large".