If you research solutions for an epidemic you have to come with realistic solutions that can be implemented, not pretend the whole thing is some kind of computer game.
Even if 'eradication' would be the only viable solution I still doubt that it would be implemented.
It would not be comfortably chosen, therefore it should not be presented as an option? Knowledge is knowledge. I am pro it.
Also, the funding came from at least one grant (OERA) that pushes for youth interaction and outreach from active researchers. It seems like zombie math --- 'treating it like some kind of computer game' --- is a pretty good way to accomplish that; how much money was spent to make a few graphs in MATLAB, to such good effect?
If you research solutions for an epidemic you have to come with realistic solutions that can be implemented, not pretend the whole thing is some kind of computer game.
Even if 'eradication' would be the only viable solution I still doubt that it would be implemented.