Hi John, Thanks as always for your careful analyses. <smile> As the pandemic seems to wane and we emerge from our bunkers, it is likely to be safer to travel to some places but not others. What is a good source of information to figure out the relative risk in various cities or countries? I would like to go to El Salvador next month (where it is warm and hope to spend time outdoors), while my wife would like to visit friends in Chicago. How can we determine the relative risk of these two (or other) destinations? THANKS!
The scale the CDC uses for international travel is different from the one it uses for the US, which is confusing, but ultimately it takes similar incidence rates per 100,000 people to get to both ratings. Chicago and El Salvador appear to be around the same level of risk according to how I read the CDC’s assessment.
Based on that, and while I like the idea of being outdoors, I think Chicago is the marginally better choice provided these were the only two destinations possible. The reason is that Chicago has better hospitals and, for me at least (perhaps not for you) would not represent international travel. Being in a foreign country could complicate getting healthcare if one or both of you does get COVID-19.
That said, the CDC map and travel advisories suggest to me that you might want to consider going to neither of these places. There are currently several places in the US that are lower-risk than Chicago. The epidemic seems to have ebbed somewhat in Florida, for instance, which just came off of a huge peak. It might be warm enough there to be outside more, too. However, that is a state that has odd ideas about disease control, and I’d personally want to steer clear unless I knew I was going somewhere that has a high vaccination rate.
There are also several international destinations that have a “low” travel advisory for COVID-19. One of those might be a better option.
My main point in this exercise is to demonstrate my thinking:
-Check the CDC map for the US, but also consider local disease control policies
-Check the US State Department travel advisories and also CDC travel advisories for international destinations, considering also how comfortable you might be if you got COVID-19 in any given country and needed healthcare
-Assume where ever you might go, it is possible you will get COVID-19, and have a contingency plan to deal with that
-Make a decision based on what you’re most comfortable with after doing all of the above
Hi John, Thanks as always for your careful analyses. <smile> As the pandemic seems to wane and we emerge from our bunkers, it is likely to be safer to travel to some places but not others. What is a good source of information to figure out the relative risk in various cities or countries? I would like to go to El Salvador next month (where it is warm and hope to spend time outdoors), while my wife would like to visit friends in Chicago. How can we determine the relative risk of these two (or other) destinations? THANKS!
Interesting question! For destinations within the US, I recommend using the CDC’s COVID-19 tracker: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#county-view|Illinois|Risk|community_transmission_level
That link will take you straight to the result for Illinois, which are not great-looking, particularly in and around Chicago.
Meanwhile, for International travel, the US State Department has advisories for a large number of countries, including El Salvador: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/International-Travel-Country-Information-Pages/ElSalvador.html
As you can see this currently says to “reconsider” travel to El Salvador. This is based on a CDC determination that El Salvador currently has a “high” COVID-19 transmission status: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices/covid-3/coronavirus-el-salvador
The scale the CDC uses for international travel is different from the one it uses for the US, which is confusing, but ultimately it takes similar incidence rates per 100,000 people to get to both ratings. Chicago and El Salvador appear to be around the same level of risk according to how I read the CDC’s assessment.
Based on that, and while I like the idea of being outdoors, I think Chicago is the marginally better choice provided these were the only two destinations possible. The reason is that Chicago has better hospitals and, for me at least (perhaps not for you) would not represent international travel. Being in a foreign country could complicate getting healthcare if one or both of you does get COVID-19.
That said, the CDC map and travel advisories suggest to me that you might want to consider going to neither of these places. There are currently several places in the US that are lower-risk than Chicago. The epidemic seems to have ebbed somewhat in Florida, for instance, which just came off of a huge peak. It might be warm enough there to be outside more, too. However, that is a state that has odd ideas about disease control, and I’d personally want to steer clear unless I knew I was going somewhere that has a high vaccination rate.
There are also several international destinations that have a “low” travel advisory for COVID-19. One of those might be a better option.
My main point in this exercise is to demonstrate my thinking:
-Check the CDC map for the US, but also consider local disease control policies
-Check the US State Department travel advisories and also CDC travel advisories for international destinations, considering also how comfortable you might be if you got COVID-19 in any given country and needed healthcare
-Assume where ever you might go, it is possible you will get COVID-19, and have a contingency plan to deal with that
-Make a decision based on what you’re most comfortable with after doing all of the above
Hope this helps!