To me this sounds a bit like "a zombie apocalypse wouldn't be such a bad thing, because natural evolution would lead to humans becoming faster runners" line of reasoning.
They called it a "serious threat". This means they're not even counting it as a fully fulfilled harmful event, let alone one that could have irreversible consequences. At least you perceived it as potentially "painful".
So the zombie analogy stands. It's like people in New York calling the total annihilation of Raccoon City a "serious threat". The people of Raccoon City would beg to differ in their assessment. And likely others if the zombies escape containment.
I do agree with you both that it's better to plan for zombies before they appear, of course.