I find it curious how the West argues that testing individuals that arrive at their airports from West African nations most affected by Ebola would not work and yet proceed to implement testing. They argue that the tests would not pick up people infected with the disease during its incubation period when these people exhibit none of the signs now familiar to the lay man. In fact, these tests would be counter productive since it would lull implementing nations into a false sense of security. The Americans are the most reluctant to ban flights from West Africa, arguing that in addition to the doubts raised by WHO experts and which has prompted the doubts in European policies highlighted above, bans would make it difficult to provide the necessary provisions to tackle the disease at its sources in Africa.

Now all this seems sensible but our historic experiences dealing not only with West’s double standards but double-tongue should make us think twice before modifying our polices in lines with the doubts that they raise. Firsts, we should note that although they raised doubts about airport testing they have gone ahead and implemented tests. They let it be known that they implemented these polices only because of public opinion and doctors doubts have been conveniently leaked showing them deriding the policy as Political Gimmicks . But the fact remains that these tests have been implemented in Western Nations.

Let’s think, it could be that they are indirectly sending massage to African nations that have implemented airport testing in order to influence them not to do so. The West may want to do so because they are worried about Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone being isolated, fearing the problems that this may cause in terms of absolutely destroying their economies and causing famine as people abandon their farms.

So West may not necessarily believe the test is ineffective in preventing the spread of Ebola but more worried about the potential West African economic collapse (with implications for the wider weak global economic recovery) and worried about what it may cost their West economies having to feed millions of starving West Africans. In other words, and as bazaar as it may seem, it may cost the West less in the end if all West Africa got Ebola if it meant they worked together as one giant Ebola nation. Already you can see the reference shifting from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra to West Africa. In such a scenario, the Ebola would then have to be tackled utilising not the resource of the West (though they would chip in here and there and provide logistics) but that of the entire West Africa, which is not now currently the case.

Much of what the West say about the limits of the airport test ring true but the danger is that the idea of abandoning the Test organically flows into the idea, which the West through WHO pushes, that we should not bother to monitor borders or ban flight from affected regions but instead adopt the policy of reacting to Ebola cases when they arise in our nations having let people from the affected region in. America Europe can risk this because of their mature Health Systems but we cannot.

Nigeria should, if she knows what’s good for her citizens, not only continue Ebola screening but ban flights from Guinea, Liberia and Sierra. Unfortunately, I know that kindhearted, naive Nigerian officials went to that their Ghana meeting organized by the West and fell line, sink and hook for their false advices. But Nigeria should know that if it had been Nigeria suffering the worst from this unfortunate scourge, every Nation in Africa would have banned flights from Nigeria. They would not only have done so but gloated about it.

We should assist financially and send volunteers and doctors if we can but Nigeria authorities should look after the well being of Nigerians first because for now we’re alone.

How about the us? Why not ban from there?

Nigeria should ban the importation of jamaican green grass..lol