like sars which looked unlikely at this stage, but if it was, for the sake of argument, the point is to make sure that any spill over cases can be rapidly contained so it never establishes itself in the uk. you are not saying this will turn into a pandemic, but what we don t want to say is have any backwash from this. we had importation from sars and ebola, we picked them up and treated them, and that is the first thing to say, and if it is going to be a pandemic, you can never stop it, and there is an illusion you can stop it, but you can t. you can delay it and that is where a lot of the debate around border and other measures then took us but what we wanted people to realise, when you are in pandemic territory, the idea of stopping it is an illusion. you can delay it, potentially, maybe. when you referred to the minority being when you referred to the minority being prevent, you mean that the virus being prevent, you mean that the virus could being prevent, you mean
border because in terms of the merits of border measures, evidence has been received border measures, evidence has been received by border measures, evidence has been received by the inquiry to the fact that less received by the inquiry to the fact that less stringent measures like screening that less stringent measures like screening and leaflets and temperature checks are unlikely to work because they can be circumnavigated. practical difficulties with any border system of restriction. scientifically, there of restriction. scientifically, there was no support for complete trorder there was no support for complete border closure or quarantine because they are border closure or quarantine because they are very difficult to maintain and politically divisive and also unlikely and politically divisive and also unlikely to work? and politically divisive and also unlikely to work? yes, in a sense the technical unlikely to work? yes, in a sense the technicaljudgmen