There is no established evidence that the deceased patient or his family knew he had Ebola. An imported case does not mean the family knowingly brought an Ebola patient into Kenya. First and foremost, WHO reports that he had been unwell for about a month and had received treatment at several hospitals in DRC. His reported care included facilities in Bondo and Kisangani before he travelled to Kenya via Uganda. Whether those hospitals tested him for Ebola is not publicly established. Had he tested positive, isolation would have been expected. Crucially, WHO considers it likely that his original illness was something else and that he acquired Ebola later while seeking care. Being sick for a month does not mean he had Ebola for a month. The family bringing him to Kenya was consistent with seeking further treatment for an illness that had persisted despite medical care. According to reporting of Africa CDC’s briefing, he travelled through Beni and crossed into Uganda through Kasindi on 1 October, before flying from Entebbe to Nairobi on 3 October. Uganda reported a normal temperature at Entebbe, and he also passed screening in Nairobi. A relative took him directly to Nairobi Hospital, where he was isolated. He tested positive on 5 October and died that night. Passing screening does not rule out infection. The subsequent infections among relatives and healthcare workers show that transmission occurred, but cannot establish exactly when he acquired Ebola or whether he was at peak infectiousness on arrival. At this point, the focus should be on how an unwell traveller from an outbreak-affected country passed successive screening points, and how healthcare workers became infected despite reported isolation. What precautions were taken from the outset, and where did they fall short? Those questions demand answers. Publicly vilifying a bereaved family, some of whose members are now battling the same disease, does nothing to answer them or protect the public. #Ebola #EbolaKE @daktari1 @SokoAnalyst @MOH_Kenya @WHOKenya @WHO