As we approach the “endgame” where testing is ubiquitous and virus numbers get closer to 0, borders become more important, because adding 500 cases to an area with 1 case is much worse than adding 2000 cases to an area with 1000 cases (you have to think in logarithms).
Why would you want to ban travel indiscriminately once testing has become ubiquitous? You can instead bar entry only to the tiny minority of travelers who test positive.
What is the lag between infection and feasible detection? Without knowing the answer to this question, I’m skeptical this consideration should suffice to justify indiscriminate travel bans. South Korea has largely contained the outbreak mostly by extensive testing and isolation, and without imposing significant travel bans. And we are assuming a scenario where tests are even more widespread, and deliver results more quickly, than currently in South Korea.
If you had an instant test with a very low false negative rate, and in quantities such that you could test every traveler, then there would be no reason to ban travel because you have created a situation where the virus cannot move, but using tests instead of banning human travel.
My impression is that you could do something almost as good with well-managed quarantine that lasted long enough for you to be sure about the test results.
Most travel is not worth the hassle of a 7-14-day quarantine though
Why would you want to ban travel indiscriminately once testing has become ubiquitous? You can instead bar entry only to the tiny minority of travelers who test positive.
Because people don’t test positive immediately after getting infected but only after the virus reproduces a bunch of times.
What is the lag between infection and feasible detection? Without knowing the answer to this question, I’m skeptical this consideration should suffice to justify indiscriminate travel bans. South Korea has largely contained the outbreak mostly by extensive testing and isolation, and without imposing significant travel bans. And we are assuming a scenario where tests are even more widespread, and deliver results more quickly, than currently in South Korea.
It depends on the test.
If you had an instant test with a very low false negative rate, and in quantities such that you could test every traveler, then there would be no reason to ban travel because you have created a situation where the virus cannot move, but using tests instead of banning human travel.
My impression is that you could do something almost as good with well-managed quarantine that lasted long enough for you to be sure about the test results.
Most travel is not worth the hassle of a 7-14-day quarantine though