Forbes / screenshot
One of his main points? "There no need to panic about the next Ebola epidemic," he said. Despite all our missteps the last time, now we're better prepared, with more awareness, better tools, and a more streamlined response.
Instead, we should worry about a future epidemic that is much more contagious than Ebola - one that spreads via the air, like a deadly flu, rather than via bodily fluids, like Ebola.
His next question shed light on just how under-prepared the US is for such a threat, compared to the threat of something like a major war. "What's more important," he asked, "having a standby military or a standby medical corps?"
He continued:
The thing that's more likely to kill 10 million people in the next 30 years is an epidemic, either naturally caused or induced by bioterrorism. So the fact that there's such a disparity in how prepared we are for war - with trainings and standbys and lists and equipment - and for an epidemic...
When Ebola struck, [people wondered] who knows how to get people to volunteer? Medicins Sans Frontieres, Partners in Health... [they] did their best almost to the breaking point to fill that void. But it was very slow compared to having a military reserve list.
In general, he pointed to how important government support and funding is to building the necessary public health infrastructure not only here but also abroad. "Philanthropy's not big enough to take on this whole problem," he said. "Government has the dominant role to play."