Thunder, he wasn't contradiction himself, someone else referenced the Black Plague and he was giving insight as to why it may have been a bad comparison, and he's right.

The last Ebola out break to reach more than 100 casualties was in 2007 (the one in 2012 was close) and the first reported out break was 1976 which is 38 years ago but even then most incidents occurred years apart and in low amount thus no real panic was ever given towards it and it suffered lack of research, now the death toll is nearing 5,000 with new patients and/or potential patience being found in the US.

When an outbreak of this happens Thunder, it could potentially be more deadly than some other disease if not handed properly which makes perfect sense for panic to occur, maybe you guys care less about it because you aren't dealing with it first hand but innocent lives are still dying in a painful way from it, now let us take a look at some of the countries being affected:

Nigeria
Liberia
Spain
United States (US and Spain are small-scale as of now)
Senegal
Guinea
Repub. Of The Congo

and many more, with multiple areas being affected that is an even greater chance of it spreading.

So tell me, what's better? "There's deadlier diseases so who cares about this it'll blow over" or "Hey, this has the potential to continue spreading and could possibly cause an outbreak, I think we should try our best to contain it"

I think we all know which is the better choice, also I would like to point out some Canadian doctors have created a large amount of test vaccine that they think will have a good success rate so containment is getting closer.

I honestly hope you aren't this stupid in real life, there is a reason he used the number 50 instead of 5.