Skip to main content

Reply to "Ebol-ing For Dollars/Government Funding/Multi-Trillion Dollars for Mass "Vaccinations""

Implement ban on travel now: Opposing view

 

The U.S. should implement an immediate temporary travel ban preventing entry by citizens of the West African countries afflicted by the Ebola virus, as I said in July. Had we done that, we wouldn't have Ebola in the U.S. right now.

No blood test can detect Ebola in victims who are newly infected. Human carriers are asymptomatic for as long as three weeks.

 

When Ebola does start to show a symptom — high temperature — that symptom can be masked with ibuprofen. Thus there is no reliable way to detect Ebola risk through physical examination.

 

OUR VIEW: Misinformation mars Ebola travel ban debate

 

But there is another reliable manner to detect Ebola risk: looking at a visitor's passport. Ebola is ravaging three countries: Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. Because the virus is spread internationally only by human beings, blocking citizens of those countries effectively blocks the virus. And we already do a 100% check of passports, at every airport and border crossing into the U.S.

Every visitor from these countries who harbors the virus, knowingly or unknowingly, is a potential weapon of mass destruction. Each one has the potential to infect innumerable Americans.

 

Each one could cost us millions of dollars in medical care for the carrier, care for other victims, quarantine costs, decontamination costs and the cost of tracing and tracking all contacts. Each one raises the risk that Ebola will find an animal reservoir in the U.S., or mutate into something more infectious.

And why should we run such risks?

 

Let's put this in perspective. We already ban visitors from other countries unless they prove that they have been vaccinated against whooping cough — a far less deadly disease than Ebola. We don't just ban visitors with whooping cough; we ban visitors unless they prove that they cannot get whooping cough.

Suspending tourism from these three countries wouldn't prevent relief efforts. On the contrary, the more we spend here, the less we can spend there.

 

More than 25 other countries have instituted such travel restrictions. They are protected, while we are not. For now, we are like lab rats — except that all lab rats enjoy health coverage.

 

Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., is a member of the House committees on Foreign Affairs and on Science, Space and Technology.

 

 

When the Ebola outbreak began to spread across West Africa this past summer, Congressman Grayson was the first elected official to call on the federal government to implement a temporary travel ban on tourists and other visitors from the stricken countries of Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone, by suspending visas issued to not-yet-admitted citizens of those countries until the virus has been brought under control. The purpose was to prevent travelers from those countries who had been infected with the virus, but were not yet showing symptoms, from entering the United States. Since then, a Liberian named Thomas Duncan traveled to the United States on a tourist visa, and brought Ebola with him. Because Duncan showed no symptoms at the time of entry, none of the current screening methods would have prevented Duncan from introducing Ebola to the United States -- but a suspension of his visa and denial of entry would have kept us safe, and also saved millions of dollars. In today's USA Today, on page 6A, Rep. Grayson explains why a temporary travel ban was - and still is - very much needed. Check it out here, and below. 

Implement Ban on Travel Now 

by Rep. Alan Grayson 

The U.S. should implement an immediate temporary travel ban preventing entry by citizens of the West African countries afflicted by the Ebola virus, as I said in July. Had we done that, we wouldn't have Ebola in the U.S. right now. 

No blood test can detect Ebola in victims who are newly infected. Human carriers are asymptomatic for as long as three weeks. 

When Ebola does start to show a symptom - high temperature - that symptom can be masked with ibuprofen. Thus there is no reliable way to detect Ebola risk through physical examination. 

But there is another reliable manner to detect Ebola risk: looking at a visitor's passport. Ebola is ravaging three countries: Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. Because the virus is spread internationally only by human beings, blocking citizens of those countries effectively blocks the virus. And we already do a 100% check of passports, at every airport and border crossing into the U.S. 

Every visitor from these countries who harbors the virus, knowingly or unknowingly, is a potential weapon of mass destruction. Each one has the potential to infect innumerable Americans. 

Each one could cost us millions of dollars in medical care for the carrier, care for other victims, quarantine costs, decontamination costs and the cost of tracing and tracking all contacts. Each one raises the risk that Ebola will find an animal reservoir in the U.S., or mutate into something more infectious. 

And why should we run such risks? 

Let's put this in perspective. We already ban visitors from other countries unless they prove that they have been vaccinated against whooping cough - a far less deadly disease than Ebola. We don't just ban visitors with whooping cough; we ban visitors unless they prove that they cannot get whooping cough. 

Suspending tourism from these three countries wouldn't prevent relief efforts. On the contrary, the more we spend here, the less we can spend there. 

More than 25 other countries have instituted such travel restrictions. They are protected, while we are not. For now, we are like lab rats - except that all lab rats enjoy health coverage. 

Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., is a member of the House committees on Foreign Affairs and on Science, Space and Technology.



This is the kind of clear, logical thinking that our policymaking so desperately needs. Show your support for our Congressman with Guts today.
 

Sincerely, 

Team Grayson 

 

We Deny Visas for Whooping Cough, But Not Ebola?

When the Ebola outbreak began to spread across West Africa this past summer, Congressman Grayson was the first elected official to call on the federal government to implement a temporary travel ban on tourists and other visitors from the stricken countries of Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone, by suspending visas issued to not-yet-admitted citizens of those countries until the virus has been brought under control.

 

More than 25 other countries have instituted such travel restrictions. They are protected, while we are not. For now, we are like lab rats — except that all lab rats enjoy health coverage.

 

This is the kind of clear, logical thinking that our policymaking so desperately needs. Show your support for our Congressman with Guts today.

 

 

 

×
×
×
×