We are being governed by the truly, bat guano insane.
So the whole concept of “quarantine” is what... obsolete?
It’s worked from the beginning of time, just not now. Right....
I guess they never heard of the concept of “checking passports.”
Why the **** can’t we do both: handle it there AND block travel from there? Why can’t we do five, ten, fifteen, a hundred things that don’t contradict each other? That’s how a free society gets things done: not with the Tsar trying to run everything, but with a multitude of counselors, where there is wisdom.
The author seems to be pretending alternative responses are somehow mutually exclusive. Why? Common sense says to implement every option simultaneously: visa ban; ban on all travelers originating in West Africa and/or on passports from Ebola countries; 3 week quarantine at their expense for anyone who slips past these measures; lean on all airlines that have flights to the Ebola countries to stop them immediately; assist Ebola countries to control the virus at the source. Less trouble and less deadly than playing whack-a-mole with the thousands each idiot potentially infects when they travel.
“...........The only way to stop Ebola is at the source.”
Right, and confine it to the source with a travel ban.
The American goal is not stopping Ebola. The American goal is to exclude Ebola. Profiles are written to discriminate against people coming from Africa
The few that slip through can die and remove the threat
Too late, the cat is already out of the bag.
Outrageous! Ban flights now!
Horsehockey
The author is an epidemiologist, so she knows better. She writes that an 80% ban will not stop all cases -- but doesn't say how many American lives might be saved. Just one is a lot, especially when it's your's, or your wife's, or one of your kids'.
I will play. They want to play the perfection game ... in other words since there is no way to perfectly keep ebola victims from coming here we should not even stop most of them from coming here.
Back at them. Stop it at the source? It won’t work. There is no way for the US to stop all ebola at the source even if we invaded the countries and controlled the population. Thus since we cant guarantee we can stop it at the source we should not try at all. That is their absurd logic.
Not to mention that we can try to do BOTH. Not with the military. But we can provide assistance to help those countries deal with ebola AND we can restrict travel from those countries. These two strategies are completely orthogonal. However the travel restriction is really the only one we can really impact much
Tara Smith has stopped ebola before. She knows.
Despite her impressive credentials, Dr. Smith is wrong. Banning travel is an effective common sense measure when part of an array of measures. Those measures have been known and refined for centuries.
So how is it that Dr. Smith, a respected epidemiologist, repudiates a valid public health tool? From her article a telling word emerges in this phrase; "...and unfairly ensnare anyone from the affected countries..."
The concept of "fair" has no place in public health. It is only legitimate in organized sporting events. Outside of that the concept of fairness is abused by children and liberals.
Adults deal with right and wrong. And it is right for a country to protect its public health. It is right to do so with travel bans.
Time for Dr. Smith to look outside of her ivory tower into the real world.
You don't fight this thing with one tool. You use them all.
You fight an epidemic by ISOLATING IT to the best of your ability AND fighting it where it IS.
ANYTHING LESS is INSANITY.
The purpose of a travel ban is not absolute security, but to significantly reduce the threat. If people from these nations have a profound need to come to the US, as a minimum they must be willing to stay in a quarantine area for an entire month.
This is similar to the way things have been done for hundreds of years now. We regularly do it for animals, and while it is a hassle, it is far better than epidemic.
“Travel Ban, Visa Ban—Either Way, It Won’t Work. The only way to stop Ebola is at the source.”
Why the OR??? Why ALWAYS the or???
What stops us from doing both (stopping tourist visas and helping West Africans at the same time)???
Perhaps some federal law, maybe???