Nigeria confirmed an Ebola case in Abuja on 20 October.

CBC described it as Nigeria’s first Ebola case in more than a decade and said the country was the fourth in Africa affected by the current outbreak. DW reported that the outbreak began in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The confirmation concerns one patient; these reports do not establish widespread transmission inside Nigeria.

The travel history is essential. It helps health officials work out where someone may have been exposed and who else might need checking. The BBC also reported, citing sources, that the patient is not Nigerian. I’m much less convinced that detail deserves the same weight.

A passport does not change the response needed in Abuja. Emphasising that a patient is foreign can offer a thin kind of reassurance — this arrived from somewhere else, so perhaps it belongs to someone else too. It can also turn a sick person into a border story before there is enough information about the outbreak itself.

“First case” is a loud phrase. I want the next updates to be boringly exact: confirmed cases rather than rumours, the virus type, whether exposed people are being reached, and what support is available. One patient should not have to stand in for a city, a country or a whole regional outbreak. The route matters. The passport really doesn’t.