[ad_1]
Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) wants to discuss the controversial accommodation ban, which is now in effect in many federal states for visitors to Germany’s internal crown risk areas, with prime ministers on Wednesday. His spokesperson Steffen Seibert announced this on Monday. Merkel wanted to hear arguments from all parties, she said.
More recently, Armin Laschet (CDU) from North Rhine-Westphalia and Michael Müller (SPD) from Berlin questioned the regulations. There were criticisms of science, for example from the Hamburg virologist Jonas Schmidt-Chanasit. The German Hotel and Restaurant Association announced a lawsuit against the regional accommodation ban on Monday.
On Monday night, the federal Minister of Health, Jens Spahn (CDU), was also critical. “When it comes to mobility and there are no uniform rules, that greatly undermines acceptance,” he said at an event of Süddeutscher Zeitung and Ifo Institute. It is “very, very important that we reach a common line with the Prime Minister on Wednesday.”
Basically, Seibert said, they want to target future protection measures to regional case numbers. Infection numbers are the yardstick for “whether the most important task, that is, being able to keep tracking contacts, can still be done or not.” Now is “the time to decide if we can successfully fight this development or if the numbers are slipping away in the direction of winter and Christmas.”
Courts are likely to be critical of housing bans. If it turns out that traveling does not contribute significantly to the spread of the virus, this would make a strong legal argument. The Bavarian Administrative Court, for example, criticized the ban on hosting guests from high-risk areas as disproportionate at the end of July, because the cutoff value of 50 infected people per 100,000 inhabitants in a week was too flat. At least when the contagion rate is limited to a business or a block of flats. The first accommodation bans, which lasted until May, had been upheld, for example, by the higher administrative courts of Magdeburg and Berlin; they were kept at the discretion of management.
Overnight stays appear to have little impact on the pandemic
And indeed, from a scientific point of view, there is not much to suggest that nightly bans have a major impact in containing the pandemic. At first, it is obvious that people who travel a lot are more likely to meet an infected contact person in train stations, hotel lobbies or motorway service stations. Staying home protects. But what helps against individual risk of infection cannot necessarily be transferred to society as a meaningful measure. An analysis in the trade magazine was already shown in April. Sciencesthat travel bans for Wuhan residents could only slightly curb the virus. I was already circulating too much on the site.
Experts from the renowned Cochrane network reach a similar conclusion in an evaluation of existing studies on travel restrictions. They found only slight indications that cross-border travel restrictions reduce the number of new infections. Many experts also doubt the meaning of the prohibition to stay overnight. Until now, there is a lack of reliable data on the role of hotels in the infection process. If hygiene requirements are met, for example for the lobby or breakfast room, they do not seem to be more dangerous than other public places such as the subway or libraries.
According to studies, the gatherings of many people in tight and closed spaces are much more threatening. The Robert Koch Institute has identified “celebrating with family and friends” as one of the most important reasons for the current “accelerated increase.” Berlin and Frankfurt have already responded with a night curfew and a ban on alcohol. In Munich, the mask is mandatory in parts of the city center and the prohibition of alcohol in restaurants after 10 pm
