> If travel restrictions are good on a risk adjusted basis to buy time for the “weeks” of analysis needed that could help with further reducing risk, let’s talk

> If travel restrictions are good on a risk adjusted basis to buy time for the “weeks” of analysis needed that could help with further reducing risk, let’s talk about it not write it off as “not working” which is non-sensical. The unstated alternative to writing it off as not working is just enforcing bans on the basis of “better safe than sorry”. To me it’s clear that experience with the other variants shows that it just isn’t safe, so there is no “better safe than sorry”. Let’s talk about not just writing off the alternative as well.