Two Yale University experts: The travel ban does not prevent the spread of the Corona virus and has other consequences

Two experts at Yale University consider that the travel ban is not effective in stopping the spread of the Corona virus, but may have broad economic and social impacts on public health.

Both Dr. Irene James and Dr. Saad Omar add that the administration of President Donald Trump has announced a temporary ban on foreigners entering the United States from those who visited China recently.

The article questions the scientific evidence used by the administration in its decision.

The experts note that there are studies on the benefit of a travel ban in limiting the spread of influenza, indicating that there is limited effectiveness for this policy, and that these restrictive measures limit the spread of infection only slightly, and that their effect is very minimal on an outbreak.

Initial data indicate that the Corona virus is more transmissible than influenza, which indicates that a travel ban will not prevent the spread of the Corona virus within the United States. Also, a strict ban may delay its appearance for a few weeks at most.

Blocking and stigma
The article adds that a travel ban could disrupt economic activity, may stigmatize populations and ethnic groups, and affect the provision of essential medicines and supplies to treat people with this virus and people suffering from other diseases.

The experts believe that the quarantine should be based on scientific evidence and not out of fear, because the quarantine has negative consequences.

In addition to restricting foreigners from entering China, the Trump administration also announced that US citizens returning from China's Hubei province would be cut off for 14 days.

The article points out that the experience with the Ebola epidemic during 2014 and 2015 when several states in the United States followed the quarantine policy to limit its spread, can be used to find out the possible effects of quarantine.

Negative consequences
The article notes that there is a study published by the Yale University School of Law and the American Civil Liberties Union about the US response to the Ebola epidemic, and that many states have quarantined out of fear rather than based on scientific evidence, which has negative consequences.

The experts explain that the application of quarantine wasted public health resources, violated the United States constitution, stigmatized groups of people, and had negative consequences for mental health.

The day before the United States announced the travel ban, the World Health Organization advised countries not to use such measures at this point, and the organization urged countries to invest in monitoring and implementing plans to contain the virus by isolating infected individuals, and tracking cases in order to identify potential people and their quarantine. , And encourage hand-washing and, above all, international cooperation.

The experts conclude by saying that in times of uncertainty and risk, policies are often formulated based on fear rather than evidence, but that short-sighted actions and endeavors to calm public anxiety can have unintended consequences.