Comment from Marston, Barbara
Barbara MarstonOpposeIndividual
Summary: A public health professional with experience in Ebola response opposes the interim final rule regarding foreign quarantine. They argue that travel restrictions are ineffective and can increase risk by encouraging travelers to hide their history, suggesting instead that the focus should be on controlling outbreaks at the source.
Docket: CDC-2026-0991 | Re: Control of Communicable Diseases; Foreign Quarantine IFR
I’m a public health professional with extensive experience controlling Ebola, including coordinating parts of CDC’s response to the 2013–2016 West Africa epidemic. Based on that experience, I oppose this interim final rule.
The idea that blocking lawful permanent residents from Bundibugyo‑affected countries will keep the virus out isn’t supported by the evidence. We know from experience that travel restrictions can actually increase risk by pushing travelers to hide their travel history and route themselves through other countries to avoid screening. When people avoid official entry points, we lose the chance to assess, monitor, and support them, making us less safe, not more.
The most effective way to prevent international spread of Ebola has always been the same: control the outbreak at the source, not at the airport. Strong entry screening and transparent reporting work; punitive restrictions do not. For these reasons, I urge withdrawal of the rule and a shift toward approaches that encourage honest disclosure and support effective public health monitoring.