Other than anarcho-libertarians, most
agree that government has a role to play in preventing and suppressing
epidemics, a classic public-health problem. Viral or bacterial infections are
not passed from animal to person, or person to person, by voluntary exchange.
Instead, proximity to another’s infection can lead to an individual’s becoming
infected, notwithstanding any market interaction.
So, even the most freedom-oriented
individuals accept government spending and restrictions on individual choice
when the threat of epidemic increases. In 2014, the arrival at Dallas-Fort
Worth airport of a man carrying the Ebola virus caused some lawmakers to seek a
ban on air travel from countries where Ebola had broken out.
Indeed, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention maintain twenty
quarantine stations at ports of entry, where public-health officials have
the power to detain arriving passengers suspected of carrying communicable
diseases.
Fortunately, we do not have to worry too
much about these risks today. People in the United States no longer worry about
contracting malaria or polio when walking near or swimming in still water. So,
it is remarkable that the American people are not outraged that the U.S.
government has let mosquitoes carrying the Zika virus enter Florida, where they
continue to infect people. This has happened while the federal government’s
energy has focused on controlling people’s private health choices, such as
forcing Catholic nuns to pay for artificial
contraceptives.
Worse, the Wall Street Journal reports the fight against Zika is reaching a
“dead end,” because there is little financial incentive to develop new
insecticide and increasing government regulation is driving out incumbent
suppliers:
German chemical
conglomerate BASF SE no longer markets in the U.S. a chemical called
temephos, which kills mosquito larvae by disrupting their nervous systems. The
company and U.S. insecticide makers that were buying temephos let its U.S.
registration lapse at the end of 2015 after the EPA requested new studies on
its effects, including its potential to interfere with endocrine production in
people.
“The cost of the
studies was five to 10 times the yearly [U.S.] sales,” said Egon Weinmüller,
head of BASF’s public health insecticide business. “We couldn’t find a way that
makes it feasible for those costs.” BASF still sells temephos in other
countries, he said.
(Jacob Bunge and
Betsy McKay, “Fight Against Zika Nears ‘Dead End’,” Wall Street Journal, January 5, 2017.)
The government’s behavior is surely
increasing the risk of a Zika breakout in the United States. Rather than
driving out current suppliers and inhibiting development of new insecticides,
the government should be encouraging innovation. This may be an area where it
is appropriate for the government to fund prizes
for new insecticides that will eliminate the threat. Or, if we do not want to
invest taxpayer dollars, at least get the burdensome environmental
over-regulation out of the way so investments by private actors such as the
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (cited in the WSJ article), have a chance
to succeed.
The government just has shift its focus
from “priorities” like rules governing the use of bathrooms by trans-gendered
persons to real public-health issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment