In any case, I'm not sure I see the argument against travelling from one place where the disease exists to another where it also exists.

my understanding of that argument is that the virus is going to go everywhere but it might do so faster or slower, and that slower is far preferable, lest there not be enough hospitals and HCPs (health care providers: doctors, nurses, medical aides, etc) for everyone with the virus and also people sick in other ways. i think the argument is that less travel for fewer people will help the spread be slower; it's sort of global community thing.

caveat, i could be misunderstanding this.