We Deny Visas for Whooping Cough, But Not Ebola?

[Alan Grayson]

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

[notadmblnd]

1. I think that it's a bad idea for reasons that have previously been discussed in MSM.

I also, think this post only serves is to spread fear (and you've missed that bus) since we don't have any new cases and we're getting further and further away from the time Thomas Duncan was in intimate contact with others and that there is little chance of the disease spreading here in the US. I know it was something the right was hoping for- but I don't think it's going to happen. However, if it were to happen, I would expect it to spread via those people that have been sent here to be treated for it who weren't citizens of any West African country and that certainly hasn't happened.

In fact, I find it hard to believe that this is actually Rep Grayson advocating this right wing meme.

[woodsprite]

3. May have spoken too soon about no other infections -- Dr. in NYC being tested

Been back from treating Ebola patients in Africa for 10 days, not self-quarantined, just presented to the hospital w/ symptoms (103 degree temp, stomach distress), supposedly went to a bowling alley a few nights ago, etc.

Here's the link to the DU thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014925877

[notadmblnd]

4. As I said, not a West African citizen. The OP was in regards to WA citizens visas

And unless he puked, shit and pissed all over the bowling alley, I doubt anyone else will present.


Oh, and I did say there have been no further infections as a result of Thomas Duncan. That means it has not spread. From what you posted, this is not a spread of the disease, this is a new case (=not spread) from someone who recently returned from West Africa. Are you suggesting American citizens who have spent time in West Africa should be denied entry to their country?


One more point, it is not a sure case, so you may be entirely wrong in your haste of pointing out another case

[Louisiana1976]

2. I find it interesting that Rep. Grayson agrees with the right wing on this issue.

[notadmblnd]

5. curious to say the least.

[dionysus]

8. ...hover over the links on the OP...

[karynnj]

6. Do we deny visas to everybody in a country that has had whooping cough diagnosis?

Not to mention, that would identify just people from that country -- not everyone exposed.

What is his problem with the current plan that anyone who comes (indirectly) from one of the infected country must come through one of five airports - and then self monitor, reporting to the CDC, taking daily temperatures. Consider that it is the self interest of anyone doing that to report if they get a fever or start having other symptoms.

This makes more sense than a broad brush travel ban for people from 3 countries -- exposed of not exposed, but allowing someone from say France or Spain who was exposed a few weeks before in.

[dionysus]

7. i like how you snuck those donation links in there below the CDC ones...