Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Instead of a travel ban on people whose flights originated in Liberia, (Original Post) pnwmom Oct 2014 OP
I have no idea how many flights a day Suich Oct 2014 #1
it just seems too complicated, i think it's one of those things where the best JI7 Oct 2014 #2
8, by my count Recursion Oct 2014 #5
Either the Ebola-affected countries do their own quarantining or face a complete travel ban. rocktivity Oct 2014 #3
Quarantine them over there. Let THEM bear the expense. kestrel91316 Oct 2014 #4

Suich

(10,642 posts)
1. I have no idea how many flights a day
Tue Oct 7, 2014, 01:35 AM
Oct 2014

come from Liberia to the US. And do the flights all go to different cities?

I can see a problem with a quarantine if someone is coming on business and is only planning on spending 4-5 days here.

Where would they be quarantined in the different cities?

I really have no idea...it's a idea worth exploring, though.

JI7

(89,271 posts)
2. it just seems too complicated, i think it's one of those things where the best
Tue Oct 7, 2014, 01:41 AM
Oct 2014

is to just try to inform people. the people in liberia and other nations hit by ebola. and people who are traveling .

make clear to them that medical care will be provided to them so if they experience any symptoms they need to get checked right away and not to worry about medical costs or anything else.

airports, airline industry and others involved in travel should all do this. even places people go for travel documents should do this. they should be told to let anywhere they seek medical care know that the come from a country where ebola is a problem. even if they don't think what they have is ebola.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
5. 8, by my count
Tue Oct 7, 2014, 03:12 AM
Oct 2014

To Logan, Newark, JFK, Dulles, and Atlanta. (I may be missing some.)

I'd expect direct flights are rare, though, compared to stopping in Europe.

rocktivity

(44,577 posts)
3. Either the Ebola-affected countries do their own quarantining or face a complete travel ban.
Tue Oct 7, 2014, 02:23 AM
Oct 2014

Last edited Wed Oct 8, 2014, 02:19 PM - Edit history (1)

All they'd have to do is make anyone who wants to travel wait 21 to 30 days -- not completely foolproof, but it would have "fooled" Thomas Duncan. We can't keep letting people travel to other countries who could get sick 21 days later.

And let's stop transporting patients until they test negative. We formed a coalition of the shilling, I mean, willing, in order to build an embassy, drop bombs and install a new government. Let us now form a coalition of the healing: the nations pooling enough medical resources to give patients world-class treatment there.


rocktivity

 

kestrel91316

(51,666 posts)
4. Quarantine them over there. Let THEM bear the expense.
Tue Oct 7, 2014, 02:24 AM
Oct 2014

Nobody gets on a plane to the US from an Ebola country without making it through quarantine without a fever.

If they manage to get to the US without a quarantine, then do it here. But it should be done over there. Supervised, of course, by OUR people and not theirs.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Instead of a travel ban o...