Question: How does stopping the issuance of visas from W Africa

[B2G]

for non-essential travel hinder aid and workers from getting in and out of the ebola zones?

TIA

[LisaL]

1. It doesn't.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. It doesn't. Nor does suspending, temporarily, the outstanding visas which have been issued.

Honestly it's incomprehensible to me the pushback against this pretty sensible proposal which a whole ton of other countries have already implemented.

And however one feels about it, the fact is if we get a few more cases like Mr. Duncan's, these sorts of restrictions WILL be put in place. Take it to the fucking bank. But at that point, all the other Americans who have been infected and possibly killed will be blamed on the people who dragged their feet for months on this.

It's a political clusterfuck waiting to happen, anyone with eyes can see it. I have to wonder what sorts of strings are being pulled behind the scenes to make sure that some 10K or so visa holders from these 3 countries are able to travel to the US.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/10/14/americans-want-flight-restrictions-from-ebola-countries-and-its-not-close/

[seveneyes]

3. It should have been done weeks ago

There is no good excuse to give Ebola a vector out of where it originated. Isolate and stop it there.

[customerserviceguy]

4. As you've guessed

it doesn't. I do support quarantine for those Westerners coming out of West Africa, whether they were there for business, diplomatic, or health aid reasons. The tiny handful of such persons can be brought in and out of the region by military planes, which could be equipped to isolate the passengers in them, after dropping off food and medical supplies to those working on solving the problem in the affected nations.

It's not all or nothing.

[Igel]

5. It doesn't.

The only hint I've heard of an excuse is the fear that if the US suspends issuing visas to the countries involved the countries involved will suspend visas for Americans (or Europeans, as well) to go to the country.

This would impact the supply of volunteer healthcare workers. That flow of assistance has been rather large. People like to compare the official Cuban response to the US official response, missing that most of the assistance has been voluntary. (Nobody tries to compare the amount of volunteer help from Cuba versus US. The comparison would be very unflattering.)

This fear and panic attack is just avid worriers being neurotic and feeding their inner angst.


I've also heard suggestions that this would be somehow racist, esp. since "we" are somehow "responsible" for Liberia. Meaning we can't restrict visas from Sierra Leone.


Oddly, I consider the worriers to be a bit more racist in some ways. Surely the Africans in the affected countries would understand that restricting visas isn't an act of economic warfare or an act of racism, but a simple public health matter. If so, there's no reason to suspect they'd be in the least upset about a short-term, temporary, restriction. To think otherwise allows the inference that the worriers think the African leaders involved can't understand this. And we're responsible for Liberia 180 years on only if we are seriously into paternalism.

[scarystuffyo]

6. You obvisouly are not collage edumcated

Why would you question our government

[MiniMe]

7. The repukes want all flights from W Africa stopped

They are scared little boys and girls.

[Warren DeMontague]

10. Way to not answer the question.

[LeftInTX]

8. I found this article

U.S. travel ban could sour ties with Ebola-hit nations
http://www.firstpost.com/world/u-s-travel-ban-could-sour-ties-with-ebola-hit-nations-1763093.html

It mentions something about business travel, but the article seems vague to me. (Either that or I'm just too tired)

I do know we import a bunch of oil from Nigeria. So, I'm surprised the GOP even wants a travel ban.

[Warren DeMontague]

11. Nigeria has it under control, for now. And they stopped letting travelers in from the

3 main countries affected, after all the havoc Patrick Sawyer caused.

I think when people talk about temporarily suspending visas, they are talking about Liberia, Sierra Leone, amd Guniea- the 3 nations the WHO has designated as having active, out of control ebola transmission.

As for the rest of it, we've already sent troops and massive amounts of aid to Liberia, for instance. Given that fact I would be genuinely surprised if our temporary halting of visa travel to the US "soured our relationship" with that nation, but I think it is a chance worth taking.

[LeftInTX]

12. I don't think it would sour our relationship with Liberia either

Heck, Liberia was going to charge Eric Duncan.

[Warren DeMontague]

13. President Sirleaf was PISSED.

And understandably so. I dont believe the people in the affected regions want to lay it on the rest of the globe, either.

[Yo_Mama]

9. It doesn't, but I think the real concern is traffic w/o visas over the southern border

I could be wrong, but I think that's the real worry.

[magical thyme]

14. It doesn't. I suspect there some reason we aren't being told. However, I also read today that

President Obama said he hasn't taken it off the table. I suspect that either one more Ebola patient gets through or either nurse not making it will lead to tightened up visas.

[840high]

15. It doesn't.

[jwirr]

16. The problem that no one is seeing here is that in order to get from Africa to the USA the traveler

must first go to another country to get a direct flight. If that other country does not test the traveler then what? Are we going to stop travel from every country in the world?

However I do think that the denial of a visa could help but if I am not mistaken Duncan had a visa. I suspect that many Africans have visas already. Especially those how went to college here or have family here.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. You suspend the visas that are outstanding, until this is contained.

Yes, people will have to fly elsewhere first. However, to get into this country they need a visa, and a passport, presumably.

A state dept. suspension of visas from L/SL/G would have kept Mr. Duncan from coming into the country.

[jwirr]

21. Than that would be a solution. Thanks for the info.

[TorchTheWitch]

20. it isn't a problem

We have the ability to track anyone coming into this country with their passport. It doesn't matter if they take 10 flights, it's easy to track where they've been and when. This was covered during the congressional hearing. The CDC has not been tracking anyone coming from outbreak areas and even though Mr. Duncan arrived in the US after taking a series of flights while not symptomatic to get to this country no one had a clue. Because of Mr. Duncan's answers on the health questionnaire and his not being symptomatic in any way until he was already in the US it's clear that all the questioning and temperature taking doesn't work.

Had he BEEN tracked the moment he arrived in the US he could have been quarantined or even just self-monitoring with someone to monitor that self-monitoring, and when he showed the initial symptoms he'd be moved into isolation, tested and transferred to one of the four hospitals in the country capable of handling an Ebola infected patient appropriately. No one else would have had to be risked becoming infected from him including his family nor put into quarantine themselves nor would two nurses also become infected.

Stopping the issuing of VISA's may be in order depending on how many people have been coming into the US from recently being in an outbreak area. But we don't know that now since no one bothered to track any of them.

The US has had MONTHS to work out a realistic plan BEFORE outbreaks in West Africa became so acute. They should have had plans in place already anyway since that's what the CDC is for... working out plans for "if it happens" events and making sure that the country is prepared.

It's ludicrous that even when the US did finally get an Ebola infected patient that hospitals weren't prepared, the CDC wasn't prepared, and they did everything completely wrong as if it was some kind of test to see how fucked up the situation could be.

I was never so angry as when I found out that Frieden had visited West Africa appropriately suited up just to TALK to Ebola patients at a distance yet approved PPE protocols for those people that would actually CARE for Ebola patients that were so incredibly lax as to be useless. He KNEW what the appropriate PPE was and that it included disinfection, he made sure that he followed it for HIMSELF but approved PPE protocols for CAREGIVERS that might as well have left them entirely naked. No wonder the workers that cared for Mr. Duncan feel like they were made into guinea pigs and were lied to.

[TorchTheWitch]

17. it doesn't

I think the nonsensical excuse of not being able to get aid into West Africa because of a travel ban is all about trade money making.

There doesn't need to be a total travel ban nor does it make sense to do nothing. Like everything else there's a middle road. Stop all travelers recently leaving the outbreak areas from coming into the US without being put into quarantine. Americans have a right to come to the US but they don't have a right to carrying a deadly disease. The US has always had the ability to bar whoever they felt necessary from entering the country.

There's no reason on earth to stop the travel of aid going INTO the outbreak areas, but we should be doing it with military flights rather than commercial flights.

Frieden's latest excuse for letting anyone come into the country willy-nilly from outbreak areas is because if we didn't let them they'd find some other sneaky way to get here (swimming???) and then we couldn't track them. We aren't tracking anyone NOW coming in on flights from outbreak areas!

Simple, just put anyone coming into this country that has recently come from an outbreak area into quarantine immediately upon arrival. In the past boat loads of immigrants coming into this country all went to Ellis island for health checks, and anyone with any communicable disease was turned back. Checking the temperature of people does NOT catch people who may be infected with Ebola as we learned from Mr. Duncan. He had no symptoms while traveling and wasn't tracked once he got here. Clearly, that approach doesn't fucking work. If he at least had to self-monitor and that was being monitored he would have gotten care immediately at his beginning stage of symptoms when he only had a temperature though he should have been immediately put into isolation at that time, and once his test for Ebola was learned to be positive sent to one of the four hospitals in the country capable to handling it.

I don't know that we need to stop issuing VISA's. I suppose that would depend on the number of people coming to this country who were recently in an outbreak area. And we don't know how many that is because we've not been tracking them when we have the the ability to do so. You can't get into this country without a passport by plane. It's easy to track someone's passport to see where they were recently. That was discussed during the congressional hearing.

[Warren DeMontague]

19. I also don't like the fact that anyone who argues for this stuff gets labeled and lectured.

Most of Africa has closed their borders to the 3 main affected countries, and for the most part, that policy has worked. There are even quarantine zones within the affected countries themselves.

The same logic which says that suspending visa entry from Liberia/Sierra Leone/Guinea until this is contained is "mean, bigoted, unfairly stigmatizing and discriminatory" ought to apply to the people inside those countries who are also being unfairly stigmatized and discriminated against because their freedom of movement is limited by being inside a quarantine zone.

There is at least one district in Liberia that has remained free of Ebola- and how have they done that?

...By not letting people from the infected areas IN.

I wonder if our "experts" are going to tell them, they're "doing it wrong".

[ecstatic]

22. Also, regarding the possibility of an infected person going

through a lot of trouble to get here indirectly (due to a travel ban)-- wouldn't that be physically impossible considering the amount of time needed for indirect travel and the speed at which the disease progresses once symptoms appear? Even if the person already happened to have a ticket, he'd be visibly ill before the last leg of the trip bound for the US.

The only remaining risk would be people who want to come to the United States illegally (undocumented), but accidentally catch ebola on the way here, which could potentially allow them to arrive prior to any symptoms appearing. Of course, that could happen with or without a travel ban.

Also, you can't have it both ways. You can't go on and on about how Nigeria contained their outbreak, while refusing to do the things that Nigeria did to stop their outbreak.

[B2G]

23. Last paragraph, exactly. nt