As the FIFA World Cup approaches, speculation on social media and cable news has already begun: Could Ebola spread at the tournament?
The short answer is that it is extremely unlikely.
The current Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo is serious and deserves global attention. However, the idea that the World Cup will somehow become a major conduit for Ebola transmission in the United States reflects a misunderstanding of both how Ebola spreads and the realities of international travel.
Ebola is not Covid-19. It is not airborne. People infected with Ebola are not contagious before they develop symptoms, and transmission generally requires direct contact with bodily fluids from someone who is sick.
In addition, there are already substantial barriers to international travel from outbreak regions, including limited flight availability, visa requirements, exit screening, and broader geopolitical and travel restrictions.
Could a traveler with Ebola theoretically arrive in the United States? In theory, yes — just as infectious travelers have crossed borders during nearly every outbreak in modern history. The likelihood of Ebola becoming a widespread public health threat tied to the World Cup is extraordinarily low.
Ironically, unjustified but loud fears about Ebola may distract us from the infectious disease threats that are far more plausible during a mass gathering event that will bring millions of people from around the globe into close contact.
The World Cup is, fundamentally, a massive international mixing event. That creates ideal conditions for respiratory viruses and gastrointestinal illnesses to spread. Influenza, Covid-19, RSV, measles, and norovirus are all far more realistic concerns than Ebola, especially among undervaccinated populations.
Measles, in particular, should worry us. The United States is already experiencing increasing outbreaks fueled by declining vaccination rates. A single infected person at a crowded stadium, fan festival, airport, or hotel could expose hundreds of people in a matter of hours.
Respiratory viruses also thrive during mass gatherings. We’ve seen this repeatedly during the Hajj and the Olympics, and it happened during the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. While most infections will be mild, the scale of the event means even small increases in transmission can strain health systems and disrupt travel.
There is also another public health reality that receives far less attention during events like these: sexually transmitted infections. Large international gatherings are often associated with increases in sexual activity, tourism, and temporary social networks, all of which can contribute to increased transmission of STIs including gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV, and mpox. Public health messaging around safer sex, access to testing, vaccination where appropriate, and rapid linkage to care will matter far more than sensational fears about Ebola in stadiums.
There are also health risks unrelated to pathogens themselves. Heat-related illness, dehydration, crowd crush injuries, and disruptions to health care access often pose a more immediate danger during mass gatherings than exotic infectious diseases. Public health preparedness for events like the World Cup requires thinking broadly about surveillance, health care coordination, laboratory capacity, communication systems, and emergency response.
Another issue that deserves attention: the state of America’s public health infrastructure itself.
The United States enters this World Cup at a moment when many public health systems remain weakened from years of political attacks, workforce burnout, chronic underfunding, misinformation, disinformation, and erosion of public trust following the Covid-19 pandemic. Local and state health departments have lost experienced personnel. Hospital systems continue to face staffing shortages. Public health agencies are increasingly expected to do more with fewer resources while simultaneously navigating growing misinformation and political polarization.
That matters during a global event of this scale.
Preparedness for mass gatherings depends on robust surveillance systems, rapid laboratory testing, strong communication between hospitals and public health authorities, and the ability to quickly identify and respond to emerging threats. Weakening those systems does not just affect responses to rare pathogens like Ebola; it affects our ability to manage everyday infectious diseases that are far more likely to impact millions of visitors and residents during the World Cup.
The good news is that the United States has spent years developing plans for large-scale public events and high-consequence infectious diseases. Many clinicians, epidemiologists, laboratorians, and emergency preparedness professionals remain deeply committed to this work. However, it is important to remember that preparedness is not static. It requires sustained investment, coordination, and public trust.
What does not help is fear-driven speculation that conflates every outbreak with the next pandemic threat. Ebola is a devastating disease, particularly for the communities currently affected in the DRC. Using it as a vehicle for panic about the World Cup risks both stigmatizing affected populations and distracting attention from the practical preparedness measures that actually keep people safe.
Infectious disease threats during the World Cup will almost certainly look much more familiar than frightening headlines suggest. The greatest risks are likely to come from pathogens we already know well and, in many cases, already have tools to prevent.
That means vaccination, surveillance, rapid diagnostics, sexual health services, public health coordination, and clear risk communication should remain the focus — not panic over a Hollywood version of Ebola spreading through stadiums.
As someone who has worked on Ebola outbreaks, including during the 2014 West Africa epidemic, I understand why the disease evokes fear. But preparedness works best when it is guided by evidence, not anxiety.
Krutika Kuppalli is an infectious diseases physician in Dallas. Her work focuses on emerging infectious diseases, outbreak response, vaccine policy, and clinical care of complex infections. She has extensive experience with Covid-19, mpox, and Ebola, including working for the World Health Organization.
