I could be wrong, but I don't think the comment you are replying to is completely serious. I think they are saying that the disease risk of global human travel

I could be wrong, but I don't think the comment you are replying to is completely serious. I think they are saying that the disease risk of global human travel seems similar to, or higher than, the disease risk of global dog travel and that similar challenges exist. Given this, banning global dog travel and not banning global human travel seems inconsistent. If banning human travel due to disease risk is over the top, is banning dog travel over the top as well? I think the difference, as you say, is that the benefits are not equal.