Once in a while, there comes along an issue that cuts to the core of American insecurities and inanity. Today, that issue is Ebola.

America is worrying too much about a disease that probably will not affect most of its citizens. The paranoia Ebola is causing is probably disrupting daily affairs more than the disease itself.

Sure, it is important to be aware of the disease and show concern. Sure, the government is making the right decision by screening all individuals coming from the West African countries where Ebola has become a worrisome issue. And sure, Ebola has no known cure yet, and that makes it a difficult disease to handle.

But the chances of contracting the disease are extremely low. And the countries where it poses a real problem have relatively poor public health infrastructure and higher rates of poverty. The United States, on the other hand, has a much more developed infrastructure.

Ebola is not transmitted the same way as many other diseases. It is not airborne, and the only way to contract it is through the bodily fluids of an infected individual when that individual is showing symptoms. One American has died of Ebola in the past month; about 35,200 died in car crashes in an entire year. And yet Americans will continue to go to work, drive at unsafe speeds, and text while driving.

And there are conditions and diseases that are more widespread and more likely to affect people based on their lifestyles, such as diabetes, obesity, and food poisoning. How many people do we see use the bathroom and not wash their hands? And how many of those people use those same unwashed hands and eat or touch their face? If news channels broadcast constant coverage of the dangers of un-washed hands, Americans would be in a frenzy to buy and use hand sanitizers and soap, trampling each other in grocery stores.

And what about guns? Over 9,000 homicides are committed with guns in a year in this country, most of them by disadvantaged inner-city youth. But there’s far more media attention devoted to Ebola than to trying to improve the lifestyle of these youths. Attacking the source of the problem by spreading awareness would be much more useful than hopeless gun bans, and yet homicide does not seem as salient in the collective American mindset as Ebola does—maybe because it is not perceived to be as imminent.

What’s more, the United States has proved relatively insensitive to Ebola before this now. The disease was first discovered in a breakout fever in Sudan in 1976. That was 38 years ago. And since it caused over 1,000 deaths. Where was our response and hysteria then? Why must we wait for it to come to us?

Ebola is only a problem for us when it affects us. American lives apparently matter more than those of others. Those African countries that have been affected by Ebola for decades were screaming for help, for research to find a treatment, for a way out. But we covered our moral compasses, refusing to lend a helping hand.

This immature and untimely response to Ebola is our own fault—we did not care about it all before, when we could have helped to contain its spread, and it has now apparently become the harbinger of death.

And when we do find a cure, it will be time to pat ourselves on the back for doing a great job. Now, the whole world can be free of Ebola because of America!

And perhaps it could have been free of it a long time ago, if only Americans were not so egocentric.

 

Shahrukh H. Khan ’17, a Crimson editorial writer, lives in Mather House.