Why travel bans will only make the Ebola epidemic worse

VOX ^ | 10/15/2014 | Julia Belluz and Steven Hoffman

[SeekAndFind]

One of the popular remedies being floated to address Ebola fears is to isolate West Africa — the Ebola hot zone — and close America off to travelers from the region. Just turn on CNN to see this argument being bandied about or tune into the political rhetoric around the crisis. As Arkansas Senate candidate Tom Cotton said recently, "We've got an Ebola outbreak, we have bad actors that can come across the border; we need to seal the border and secure it."

The fear is understandable, especially as Ebola appears poised to spread closer to home. America last week recorded its first Ebola death with the passing of a Liberian visitor Thomas Duncan, and yesterday, the CDC announced the first-ever case of Ebola transmission to Duncan's nurse.

As Ebola panic peaks, conspiracy theories are spreading fast. So now is the time when we need to check our irrational reactions to this horrible crisis and avoid policies that will divert scarce resources from actual remedies. And we know from past experience that airport screening and travel bans are more about quelling the public's fears than offering any real boost to public health security.

1. Airport screening is political theater

Last week, the US government announced a new airport screening regime for incoming travelers from West Africa. Passengers arriving from Sierra Leone, Guinea and Liberia to five US airports will now be questioned about potential Ebola exposure and have their temperatures checked.

Exit screening has already been underway in West Africa since the summer, and famously failed in the case of Duncan. He flew to Dallas with Ebola incubating in his body, and did not disclose the fact that he had close contact with a dying Ebola patient days before his trip.

This failure shouldn't be a surprise. We know from past outbreaks that these techniques don't work. Entry and exit screening was used during the 2003 SARS pandemic. A Canadian study of the public-health response following the outbreak found that airport screening was a waste of money and human resources: it didn't detect a single case of the disease.

This screening was "inefficient and ineffective," the authors of the assessment concluded, noting that the Canadian public health agency should seriously rethink using it again in the future. Another study found that those clunky and costly thermal scanners used to detect fever in airports were similarly useless when it came to singling out sick people who are trying to enter a country. So spending extra money to identify feverish people at airports — especially those with Ebola who can be undetectable for days until they are symptomatic — is an expensive and ineffectual exercise.

2. Closing borders would be a disaster

Taking airline panic one step further, another idea floating around these days is to just close off West Africa to the rest of the world. Allow Ebola to fester over there, and keep people safe over here.

In opposing this idea, public health experts unanimously agree: sealing borders will not stop Ebola spread and will only exacerbate the crisis in West Africa — and heighten the risk of a global pandemic.

There are three reasons why it's a crazy idea. The first is that it just won't work. In CDC Director Tom Freiden's words, "Even when governments restrict travel and trade, people in affected countries still find a way to move and it is even harder to track them systematically." In other words, determined people will find a way to cross borders anyway, but unlike at airports, we can't track their movements.

The second is that it would actually make stopping the outbreak in West Africa more difficult. Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said, "To completely seal off and don't let planes in or out of the West African countries involved, then you could paradoxically make things much worse in the sense that you can't get supplies in, you can't get help in, you can't get the kinds of things in there that we need to contain the epidemic."

Some have suggested a half-measure: close borders allowing exceptions for doctors, aid workers, and medical supplies only. The problem with this idea is that responses to humanitarian crises are not well-organized affairs. They're chaos. A bureaucratic regime that systematically screens who can go in and out of affected countries would only slow down or make impossible the much-needed relief. Plus, many aid workers — like reserve staff for Doctors Without Borders — would be responsible for booking their own tickets to get to the affected region. How would they do this then? And how long would it take to get them over there?

The third reason closing borders is nuts is that it will devastate the economies of West Africa and further destroy the limited health systems there. The World Bank already estimates this outbreak could cost West African economies up to $33 billion. That's a lot for any country, but especially when you're talking about some of the world's poorest. World Health Organization director Margaret Chan reminded us that 90 percent of any outbreak's economic costs "come from irrational and disorganized efforts of the public to avoid infection."

3. The best way to protect Americans is by protecting West Africans

We live in a world where many crises are predictable. We don't know when the next one will strike, or where, but we know it will eventually come. In the health field, we even know approximately what it will look like. Every few years, for example, we seem to get another global pandemic that spreads across borders as if they don't exist. In 2002 it was SARS, then in 2009 it was Swine Flu. Today it's Ebola. In five year's time it will be something else.

If we know these health crises are coming, why is it that we never seem adequately prepared? It's true that we can't prepare for every kind of outbreak in every place at every time; having a large standing army of white coated doctors at the ready would just be too expensive. But there is no reason we can't use the lessons learned from past outbreaks to make better choices in this time of Ebola.

We also need to stop diverting precious resources on policies and procedures that do nothing to help the public. Instead of using airport screening and entertaining plans to seal borders, the government should focus its attention and resources on West Africa where the outbreak is out of control and where real action could actually be helpful in protecting America's health security. Because we know this for sure: the longer Ebola rages on in West Africa, the more people get the disease there, the more of a chance it has of spreading elsewhere.

Two people in the US have been stricken by Ebola; more than 8,000 have in West Africa. The best way to avoid more cases in America is by protecting West Africans.

[SeekAndFind]

FROM THE ABOVE WEBSITE:

The Ebola virus is extremely rare. Among the leading causes of death in Africa, it only accounts for a tiny fraction. People are much more likely to die from AIDS, respiratory infections, or diarrhea, as you can see.



The current outbreak involves the Zaire strain, which was discovered in 1976 — the year Ebola was first identified in what was then Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo). That same year, the virus was also discovered in South Sudan.

Since 1976, there have only been about 20 known Ebola outbreaks. Until last year, the total impact of these outbreaks included 2,357 cases and 1,548 deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. They all occurred in isolated or remote areas of Africa, and Ebola never had a chance to go very far.

And that's what makes the 2014 outbreak so remarkable: the virus has spread to five countries in Africa plus America, and has already infected more than 8,000 people. It has killed more than 4,000 people. That is more than triple the sum total of all previous outbreaks combined.

[jospehm20]

Idiots.

[AngelesCrestHighway]

Closing borders would be a disaster...? BULLCRAP! only for the damn globalists!

[First_Salute]

EBOLA is a major NBC (nuclear, biological, and chemical) continuation of events and must be treated as a war particularly against the B, by every nation.

The USA is very late at getting the logistical theater of operations going along the west coast of Africa. Whether or not “boots are on the ground” as direct attendants of people in need, boots must be on the ground, handling the logistical needs *for* the locals and medical people who are doing the work.

IOW, the locals and medical people *there* at the front lines ... need to look over their shoulders and see a ready supply of fresh water, protective gear, treatment of protective gear, and thoroughly efficient cremation plants -— because no person, nor pet, nor animal, nor associated clothing of EBOLA victims deceased, should go anywhere but straight to these cremation plants.

It’s war, and you have to kill EBOLA before it kills you. EBOLA cannot be left laying around in dead animals, dead people, dead anything - buried, because of “nice thoughts” and “wishful thinking.” BECAUSE, EBOLA comes back from the dead -— which is why we’re having the problem, again. We must arrange things so that EBOLA cannot be dug up, again.

ISIL / ISIS will try to.

[American Constitutionalist]

NO !

Would the radical black liberals, or liberals in general in Congress and the media be in favor of a travel ban of Ebola if ? Ebola came from a mostly white country as England ? Germany ? Or a mostly Asain country as Japan or China ?

[2ndDivisionVet]

Ted Cruz advocates military transport for Ebola aid, calls for travel ban
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/3215596/posts

[First_Salute]

Better than what the Obama Administration has implemented:

1) pigeon hole, ie control, the VISA's

2) establish a clinic in Africa, near an airport, where all outbound - to - the - USA fliers must enter and be processed

3) establish a set route using charter flights only between Africa (that clinic -and- airport) and the USA --- ie, if you want to fly to the USA, and you are from Africa and/or your VISA and/or passport place you as "from Africa" ... you have to adhere to (1), (2), and this, (3) ... or you cannot board the flight to the USA.

[chris37]

Sorry, I don’t believe anything anyone from this country, or pretty much any other country, has to say about this or anything else.

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

Taking airline panic one step further, another idea floating around these days is to just close off West Africa to the rest of the world. Allow Ebola to fester over there, and keep people safe over here.

That's a complete mischaracterization of any position I've heard.

[Usagi_yo]

Why are they trying to get us to swallow this?

Travel ban, gasoline and matches.

[DoughtyOne]

FacePalm^42,893


Ramirez's latest political cartoon LARGE VERSION 10/16/2014: LINK  LINK to regular sized version of Ramirez's latest, and an archive of his political cartoons.
In this political cartoon, Ramirez presents, "Erdogan and Obama"

FReepers, 18% of the FReepathon goal has been met.  Please click above and pencil in your donation now.  Lets retire this effort early this quarter. Thank you!
...this is a general all purpose message, and should not be seen as targeting any individual I am responding to...

[mbarker12474]

1. Screening ebola passengers is of course imperfect. But that is not what is desired. What is desired is a blockade preventing ALL travel. Not mere screen.

This also imperfect, but increases the level of difficulty for passengers making their way to the U.S.

2. Aid and comfort and medical treatment can be sent to West Africa, whether or not the U.S. establishes a blockade of West Africa. It is independent of the blockade.

Whether choosing to do so is proper and wise is another question.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

Because we are smarter than you are.

[Adder]

That’s some mighty stupid reasoning, vox.

It will make it worse over there...yeah...better that than worse everywhere.

Determined people will get out. So? They have to show up somewhere: send them back. Look what one infected did here. What happens when we spread the joy around?

The flights part is just dumb. You can’t get supplies in? are you that absolutely stupid? Oh the po’ po’ Dr.s without borders folks...oh worra worra about them!

Effin idiots. I keep running into these arguments and they never make sense.

[FreedomStar3028]

However. They know it has the potential to kill ten times more people, then AIDS has. In a much shorter time period, as well.

If it keeps spreading in Africa, in ten months there will be over a million victims in Africa alone. If it spreads in Europe and America, the graph will look very much the same as the time/infected graphs of West Africa from patient zero to now after ten months.

Just remember that the more people that are infected, the higher the chance becomes that the virus mutates into something much much worse.

Why haven’t we ever seen Ebola spread like this before? All the other outbreaks were fairly small. However this strain seems to infect those wearing heavy protective gear. We have had 40 years to study this virus. In all that time we have either gone backwards in our knowledge of this virus, or it has mutated. If the latter is true, then everything they are telling us is wrong, and it is much worse than we imagine.

[mbarker12474]

>Would the radical black liberals, or liberals in general in Congress and the media be in favor of a travel ban of Ebola if ? Ebola came from a mostly white country as England ? Germany ? Or a mostly Asain country as Japan or China ?

Or Tel Aviv?

[ThomasMore]

” only for the damn globalists!”

EXACTLY. George Soros funded idiots.

[AAABEST]

Anyone and everyone with the slightest degree of common sense understands that keeping people who have Ebola out of the community reduces the risk of Ebola.

It's not hard to understand or implement; we can do it by simply flagging or not issuing visas with virtually no disruption to travel in or out of any country by essential personnel.

The main reason we're seeing articles like this is because they're written by compromised Obola automatons.

[Dr. Thorne]

I assume you are aware that VOX is BS.