Ebola - What Should the Gubmint Do?

The screening procedures you speak of are being put in place for commercial flights. I fail to see how a symptom free person flying home on Delta poses a bigger risk than a symptom free person flying home in a chartered military flight.

The correct policy needs to keep potential carriers of the Ebola virus out of the general population of American citizens.

F'rinstance, someone arriving from the Ebola Hot Zone should not be permitted to leave his residence 5 days after returning to the USA, to ride three subway trains, go to a bowling alley, go to a restaurant, go to a second bowling alley, and take a taxi home.

BOTTOM LINE: Voluntary quarantine does not work; people do not always do the right thing.


1. A ban on permitting anyone from the affected areas to fly into the USA would accomplish the proposed isolation most effectively and at the lowest cost. Such a ban would also relieve commercial airlines flying into the USA from the potential hazard of contaminated aircraft. [If/When an aircraft were to prove to have been contaminated, DonDiego would expect air travel plans to drop rather precipitously.]

2. A quarantine for a sufficient time to guarantee the traveler is not infected would also accomplish the goal of keeping infected persons out of the general population. This would have to be at least 21 days, although recent comments from medical personnel suggest 42 days may actually be necessary.

2.a. The present "protocol" permits the traveler to self-monitor himself at home. This has proven unacceptable. [And if a presumedly intelligent, well-intentioned physician would violate his self-monitored quarantine, DonDiego would expect a less-informed or less well-meaning traveler to be even more likely to violate such a voluntary procedure. And someone who believes himself to be infected and flies to the USA for the purpose of receiving medical treatment, would have no reason to quarantine himself.]

2.b. Given the failure of self-monitoring, DonDiego suggests anyone arriving from a Hot Zone should be really quarantined and kept away from the general population. As already stated a ban on flying into the USA would accomplish this with little cost, . . . but it would allow travel elsewhere than the USA. Other countries would presumedly do whatever they think best. Otherwise, a secure quarantine facility, or facilities, would be required whether on the periphery of the Hot Zone or within the USA; think something like Ellis Island with spartan accommodations and medical facilities on-site.

3. Although not strictly applicable to the Ebola Epidemic, prohibiting unauthorized border crossing into the USA would serve generally to also keep diseases from arriving. [Apparently the massive arrival of "youths from Central America" in the Summer of 2014 was accompanied by, f'rinstance, an infusion of scabies, chicken pox, MRSA staph, and other infections.]

4. None of the above precludes anyone from flying into a Hot Zone to, f'instance, provide medical aid or supplies of any sort. DonDiego would encourage anyone so inclined to help out those in need.

The obama and liberal theme for the past 6 years is that the govt can handle all problems. This case as well as other problems in other departments have consistently shown that the fed govt is not capable of handling anything.

Why not just quarantine folks in an airport hotel including everyone that was on the plane with them until the 21 day period passes.?

Maliber - That would be thousands of people & then you would have to decontaminate the entire hotel. And in the future who would want to stay in a hotel that was an "ebola hote"

Ban commercial travel like England did. Transport people on special flights

All people flying home who've come in contact with an Ebola patient should be quarantined. I don't care what sort of flight. Apparently PJ disagrees.

Because hotels are not equipped to effectively quarantine Ebola patients. Also, what private company is willing to do so?

The Governors of New York and New Jersey have just announced new mandatory quarantine requirements for international travelers arriving at airports within their States. The travelers will be monitored or quarantined based upon the risk to be determined by the Country from which they are traveling and the estimated level of exposure to Ebola.

Travelers in the highest risk level category will be quarantined in a Government regulated facility for 21 days.

HEY ! Governors Cuomo and Christie must've read poor old DonDiego's earlier thread and decided to do what The Obama fails to do, . . . err on the side of safety.

Ref: CBS NYC

There are some inherent advantages to Military transports over Commercial Flights in this Disaster Relief effort including:

1. Military transports land at US Air Bases in a controlled environment and not at the worlds largest Public Transportation Hubs.
a. This makes it easier to enforce quarantines or to take effective cleanup protocols should someone vomit or shit his or her pants on the ride home....and does not expose the general traveling public to those who have come from the Ebola Zone (Who may or may not be carrying the Virus)

2. Military transports are designed to move people and supplies to trouble spots. This includes advantages of large cargo handling, ability to more easily clean and disinfect, a crew specifically trained for the mission and the ability to land in more severe weather and at smaller airports.

3. Military transports are more flexible in scheduling. They can operate around the clock. They can work on set schedules or as needed. They can ramp up to incredible levels of service very quickly.

But aside from all that, the biggest advantage to a commercial flight ban is it prevents travel from the infected areas except by essential personnel. If you don't get it yet, essential personnel are people fighting the Ebola War. Now you might say that...yeah..they'll just fly to Italy and then to America...and I'll say we can stop that too.

The key is there is no justification at this point for Tourists, Businesspeople, Travelers, Ebola Refugees or anyone except our Ebola Fighters to come here from there. Fighting Ebloa there ...in Africa should be the focus. Every case generated from slipping though weak travel restrictions has been a diversion of resources that represents an unnecessary risk we took. Sure, it's unlikely to be a US epidemic...but every case is costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and specialized medical resources that could have been directed at crushing the virus at it's root.

Now, another answer might be to restrict Commercial flights to Ebola Fighters. That would be another step in the right direction and I could see that when/if there is a rush to leave the infected areas and our medical personnel have to wait days for a flight home.....but if commercial flights are restricted to the mission, could you really call them 'Commercial Flights' at that point?