Obama administration officials, including the political appointees in charge of the Centers for Disease Control, continue to insist that travel restrictions to Ebola-infected countries and tighter border controls in the U.S. will not make the spread of the virus less likely.
In fact, without much explanation that makes any sense to Americans, they inexplicably contend such efforts will actually be "counterproductive."
Huh?
What's the evidence?
What are they talking about?
TRENDING: St. Patrick's role on the 'external hard drive'
How could isolation of the disease and its victims actually make the spread of Ebola more likely?
It doesn't make much sense, unless you understand that these assertions are political calculations rather than public-health decisions.
For instance, it's obvious now that such common-sense determinations to restrict travel and tighten border control policies are actually working – in Africa.
So far, 4,500 people in West Africa have been killed by Ebola, but the travel restrictions and border control limits are being credited with limiting the spread of the disease in Africa to five countries, two of which appear to have snuffed it out.
The Associated Press reports officials in Africa credit exactly the common-sense policies rejected by Barack Obama and his politicized health and medical experts. The disease is now confined mostly to Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea.
"Senegal did so well in finding and isolating a man with Ebola who had slipped across the border from Guinea in August that the World Health Organization on Friday will declare the end of the disease in Senegal if no new cases surface," AP reported last week. "Nigeria is another success story. It had 20 cases and eight deaths after the virus was brought by a Liberian-American who flew from Liberia to Lagos, Nigeria's commercial capital of 21 million people, in July. Nearly 900 people were potentially exposed to the virus by the traveler, who died, and the disease could have wreaked havoc in Africa's most populous nation. Instead, Ebola appears to have been beaten, in large part through aggressive tracking of Ebola contacts, with no new cases since Aug. 31."
The World Health Organization called the last accomplishment "a piece of world-class epidemiological detective work."
That's the good news.
The news is not so good in America where epidemiological detective work has not been anything close to "world-class" thanks to political meddling.
"Border closings may also be helping halt the spread of Ebola," the AP reported – without comment on U.S. intransigence on the idea. "Ivory Coast, Guinea-Bissau and Senegal, all of which share borders with at least one of the three most affected countries, have closed those borders."
The AP report continued: "Authorities in some African countries imposed tight air travel restrictions, tougher than those contemplated by the U.S. or British governments. South Africa and Zambia slapped travel and entry restrictions on Ebola-stricken countries. Kenya Airways, the country's main airline, stopped flying to the affected lands. In Zimbabwe, all travelers from West Africa are put under 21-day surveillance. Health officials regularly visit those travelers to check their condition. Nigeria initially banned flights from countries with Ebola but relaxed the restriction once it felt that airlines were competent to take travelers' temperatures and follow other measures to prevent people with Ebola from flying. Nigeria has teams taking the temperature of travelers at airports and seaports. In Ethiopia, the main international airport in Addis Ababa screens all arriving passengers – including those from Europe and the U.S. – for fever using body scans."
How is it possible that America cares less for the safety and health of its citizens than do these African nations?
That's what happens when policies of political correctness take priority over public health.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact [email protected].
|