There are tradeoffs to every decision, it's risk management. You are solidly stuck in the "precautionary principle" (just throwing some jargon your way), which ignores the fact that every decision has consequences, and that catastrophe lies on all extremes. My way of modeling (and those of several Stanford scientists) was more useful, and that was proven awhile ago, and allowed a more balanced approach to avoid catastrophe on any side. I was always for serious measures, but I was also for doing it in a way that we learned something from it and moved forward in a way to avoid doing this in the future. We decided to model it improperly and then hide in fear until the threat was past and I don't think we will learn anything from it.