Unassigned

ABC News: 'Experts' Say Travel Restrictions to Contain Ebola Could Have Unintended Consequences

Brett T.
Brett T.  |  9:00 PM on May 25, 2026

There's an Ebola virus outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo that we'd prefer not to come to the United States. Let's check in and see how the citizens of Congo are dealing with it. Mandated masking? Not quite. Instead, they're burning down treatment centers.

Advertisement

After it was attacked by angry relatives, huh? But wait, there's more:

The Associated Press reports:

People set fire to an Ebola treatment center in a town at the heart of the outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo on Thursday after being stopped from retrieving the body of a local man, a witness and a senior police officer said, as fear and anger grow over a health crisis that doctors are struggling to contain.

…

The bodies of those who die from Ebola can be highly contagious and lead to further spread when people prepare bodies for burial and gather for funerals. The dangerous work of burying suspected victims is being managed wherever possible by authorities, which can be met by protests from victims’ families and friends.

The center in Rwampara was burned by local youths who became angry while trying to retrieve the body of a friend who had apparently died of Ebola, according to a witness who spoke to The Associated Press by telephone.

“The police intervened to try to calm the situation, but unfortunately they were unsuccessful,” said Alexis Burata, a local student who said he was in the area. “The young people ended up setting fire to the center. That’s the situation.”

Recommended

Monday Morning Meme Madness
FuzzyChimp
Advertisement

So … local youths burn down a treatment center to retrieve the Ebola-infected body of a friend.

ABC News reports that "experts" warn that travel restrictions to keep Ebola from infecting the U.S. can have "unintended consequences." 

Like what? Dr. Jade Cobern reports:

"With Ebola, the key issue is not casual travel, it's whether infected or exposed people can be identified, isolated and monitored," said John Brownstein, an epidemiologist and chief innovation Officer at Boston Children's Hospital and ABC News medical contributor. 

Brownstein said a temporary, specific and targeted travel policy may help protect the U.S. homeland from cases initially, but only as part of larger evidence-based strategies to stop spread at the source.

"We always worry that broad travel restrictions offer people a false sense of safety. Incubation periods can vary and people may not be aware of their own exposures to people with a virus,” Brownstein said. 

…

Others pointed to the failures of previous travel bans, such as during the early days of the COVID-19 global pandemic.

"A broad travel ban does not make sense based on what we know so far," Dr. Krutika Kuppalli, a Dallas-based infectious disease physician who specializes in emerging infections, told ABC News. "If the goal is truly to reduce risk, policies need to be grounded in epidemiology and exposure risk, not nationality."

Advertisement

According to the story, there isn't even a travel ban. U.S. nationals returning from Congo, Uganda, and South Sudan within the last 21 days will be funneled to Dulles Airport in Virginia, to be screened for symptoms and interviewed about possible exposure. But let's not resort to national travel bans. Let's listen to the COVID-19 experts.

Advertisement

We think the intended consequences of keeping the Ebola virus out of the United States outweigh the experts' unintended consequences.

***