3 ms·
There are constant new outbreaks, at the rate of several per year. (If you want to try to keep up, see here: https://promedmail.org/ https://promedmail.org/ ) T
by knzhou 6y ago
There are constant new outbreaks, at the rate of several per year. (If you want to try to keep up, see here: https://promedmail.org/ https://promedmail.org/ ) The vast majority fizzle out, and for the rest, travel restrictions are not often useful or necessary. Recent examples of this include SARS, MERS, swine flu, Zika, several hemorrhagic fevers, and resurgences of diseases like measles and plague. If the WHO responded to all of these with a call for a global travel ban, travel would never be allowed.
- rglullis 6y ago> responded to all of these with a call for a global travel ban No. There is no call for a "global travel ban". Are you deliberately misunderstanding what I am saying? The call is (or better, it was, now is too late) for a restriction of mobility in the place of an outbreak, until they either "fizzle out" or are controlled/understood/resolved by development of treatment and/or vaccine. If an outbreak is likely to "fizzle out", then the restriction will be for a short time and localized to the source and chances of spreading around the globe is reduced. And in case the outbreak is highly contagious like this one, an early and swift restriction would prevent the pandemic in the first place, or at the very least slow down things as much as possible to avoid exponential explosion of cases. THAT IS THE KEY POINT! The WHO should be asking for an early local lockdown so that we wouldn't have to act later in a global one.