The public-health establishment has unanimously opposed a travel and visa moratorium from Ebola-plagued West African countries to protect the U.S. population. To evaluate whether this opposition rests on purely scientific grounds, it helps to understand the political character of the public-health field. For the last several decades, the profession has been awash in social-justice ideology. Many of its members view racism, sexism, and economic inequality, rather than individual behavior, as the primary drivers of differential health outcomes in the U.S. According to mainstream public-health thinking, publicizing the behavioral choices behind bad health—promiscuous sex, drug use, overeating, or lack of exercise—blames the victim.That's why, instead of fooling around with pump handles, John Snow should have just had cholera sufferers put in the stocks for spreading miasma.
...The public-health profession has a clear political orientation, so it’s quite possible that its opposition to a visa and travel moratorium is influenced as much by belief in America’s responsibility for the postcolonial oppression of Africa, and suspicion of American border enforcement, as it is by a commitment to public-health principles of containment and control.The philosophy behind this is that anyone who wants to help people is some sort of freak and therefore can't be trusted despite their training and accomplishments in the relevant field, and we should instead listen to political hacks like Heather Mac Donald.
When seen from a distance of years, this alarmism will disgust and embarrass our descendants. But the spreaders themselves are only looking as far ahead as Election Day.
