Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty sure of Ebola went airborne you wouldn’t need to use government force to keep people at home. Covid needed a marketing campaign and a healthy dose of 24/7 media fearmongering to get anybody to “take it serious”. And even then a good chunk of people called BS on it pretty quickly. If there was airborne Ebola and dudes were dropping dead on the streets with blood coming out of every orifice… totally different sc…
At least, in the USA, we have learned nothing from the past two years. I'm pretty sure if Ebola went airborne, and people were dropping dead in the streets, there would still be a large number of people downplaying, denying, and politicizing the virus. And if the government dared to even suggest they voluntarily isolate, they'd be angrily protesting in the street for their innate right to spread it around and die. We…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ebola_virus_cases_in_the_Uni...
If anything, I recall hearing calls for greater restrictions on the cases and close contacts rather than more lax treatment.
That leads me to conclude that people are capable to calibrate their support for restrictions based on some combination of virulence and transmissibility of a disease. Ebola is far more virulent than SARS-CoV2 but less transmissible, so perhaps people have a different level of concern for each of the factors than others would wish.
(It sucks that this matters to some in the discussion, but I’m double-vax’d plus boosted and went out of my way to get each of those shots literally within two days of my first moment of eligibility.)