Stop flights and immigrants with infectious disease.. Its that simple\
This is already being done.
Airport official in The West African countries affected by the current Ebola epidemic
(Liberia, Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Senegal) check the temperatures people before allowing them to board commercial airplanes, while those in countries like the US check again check the temperatures of people arriving from these countries. If their temp is elevated, they are taken to hospitals and tested for Ebola and other diseases.
Because Ebola can take up to 3 weeks to show symptoms such as elevated temperature, this policy prevents the spread of the disease during and for a few days after travel. This is why it’s important to monitor people who have traveled from Ebola outbreak places after their arrival.
Such monitoring could be done by confining all arriving travelers in special facilities for 3 weeks and monitoring them there. There are at least these problems with this approach:
- Laws - US law requires due process before depriving people of their liberty. This process requires a convincing demonstration to a court that the risk to the public of not doing warrant the confinement. Considering to the best of their ability the scientific data about Ebola, US court have decide in that it does not.
- Cost - About 150 people are estimated to arrive each day in the US from Ebola affected countries, so the about 3150 people would need to be detained for the duration of the policy. Assuming prison-like costs, this would cost about $250,000/day. Assuming hospital-like costs, it would cost about $13,500,000/day. The question of who would pay, and how much, would need to be addressed.
- Self-reporting truthfullness – because many people wouldn’t want to be confined for 21 days, so would lie about where they were traveling from to avoid it. We only know that travelers originate in Ebola outbreak countries because they self-report it, so it would be very difficult to catch people if they lied.
I think it’s this last problem – self-reporting – that most influence the US’s CDC and other health agencies in recommending the less burdensome approach of self-monitoring of people traveling from Ebola outbreak countries.
Perhaps greater, public health officials fear that if greater burden is placed on travelers from these countries, fewer healthcare workers will be available in these countries to control the Ebola outbreak there, resulting in a great increase in the total number of infections, a corresponding great increase in the number of infected people traveling to other countries, and the current epidemic becoming a global pandemic.
In short, in the opinion of the best public health experts, a strict “isolate and detail” policy, even if made legal, would make the Ebola epidemic worse, not better.
Countries and communities have been doing that since they recognized infectious disease since the Middle Ages. .
Isolate and detain
I don’t think following disease control example from the Middle Ages is wise. For example, the French government ca 1350 followed a policy of confining suspected Black Death plague (Yersinia pestis) carriers, who they believed to be primarily Jews, in walled and gated ghettos. In some towns, Frightened people massacred the people in the ghettos. Please from church and medical authorities to discontinue these policies were often ignored.
That our present-day governments don’t ignore legal and medical experts is, I believe, a reason why we refer to the Middle Ages as the Dark Ages, and why we’re better now than then.
And if your daughter gets Ebola, then its just whatever Obama Policies..
This kind of argument is an appeal to emotion
, a logical fallacy. You should avoid logical fallacies in your posts at hypography, Racoon.