The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new recommendation urging all domestic travelers to "consider getting tested as close to the time of departure as possible to your trip." with rise in COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations.

They also issued guidance recommending post trip testing after air travel especially if you've been spending time in crowded areas and did not have a well fitted mask or respirator.


https://abc7.com/coronavirus-covid-test ... /11861963/
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/cdc- ... index.html

Separately I’ve seen some health departments in California start speaking about the return of indoor mask mandates and other restrictions as local cases rise.

We probably should never miss and opportunity to test, so cant blame them offering the recomondation.

Neighbor to the North, has required COVID-19 testing to board domestic flights and trains. No test, no flight.

Sentiments like that are why recommending testing is nowhere near sufficient.

mercure1 wrote:

Neighbor to the North, has required COVID-19 testing to board domestic flights and trains. No test, no flight.

Canada does not/has not ever required covid testing to board domestic flights and trains. At present, the requirement is to show a vaccine pass and wear a mask.

https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid/trave ... tic-travel

Well, I can’t say that I disagree. I recently tested positive over the weekend and I traveled last Thursday….. But it’s up to each individual still, hence it is why it is a recommendation…

mercure1 wrote:

We probably should never miss and opportunity to test, so cant blame them offering the recomondation.

Neighbor to the North, has required COVID-19 testing to board domestic flights and trains. No test, no flight.

Not true at all. I’ve flown domestically in Canada recently. No such things are required.

The CDC is “recommending” you test. This isn’t something that’s going to be required. The CDC also “recommends” you only drink skim milk and don’t eat red meat.

This is nothing.

Great, more asymptomatic testing.

mercure1 wrote:

We probably should never miss and opportunity to test, so cant blame them offering the recomondation.

Neighbor to the North, has required COVID-19 testing to board domestic flights and trains. No test, no flight.

Canada does not and has not required testing to board domestic flights. We only require proof of being fully vaccinated.
Canada has also dropped testing requirements when coming back in to the country….again as long as you’re fully vaccinated. Let’s hope the US follows suit very quickly.

While most folks will simply ignore the recommendation, it is a sensible idea. We should not miss an opportunity to test, and do it often.

One of my clients requires weekly test for staff that elect to work in the office. My kids school also test students and staff on weekly basis.

The sooner we are able to identify cases and have folks isolate and break potential transmission chains, the better for society. I can't imagine anyone would want to fly and spend hours next to a confirmed case.

I recently was on 4 completely full flights across country and back. The airports were busy too. We were among the few who wore masks. Neither of us were feeling good on our return. I had my normal runny nose. We got PCR tested 4 days later and were negative. I didn’t want to infect friends or family I see. That’s why we tested ourselves.

UPlog wrote:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new recommendation urging all domestic travelers to "consider getting tested as close to the time of departure as possible to your trip." with rise in COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations.

They also issued guidance recommending post trip testing after air travel especially if you've been spending time in crowded areas and did not have a well fitted mask or respirator.


https://abc7.com/coronavirus-covid-test ... /11861963/
https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/cdc- ... index.html

Separately I’ve seen some health departments in California start speaking about the return of indoor mask mandates and other restrictions as local cases rise.

Whether you believe in testing or not,, probably can't do more than recommend it as I don't believe the testing infrastructure is in place to require it. LAX last Sunday had somewhere around 97000 people pass through TSA.
https://mobile.twitter.com/flyLAXairpor ... awa.org%2F

MrBretz wrote:

I recently was on 4 completely full flights across country and back. The airports were busy too. We were among the few who wore masks. Neither of us were feeling good on our return. I had my normal runny nose. We got PCR tested 4 days later and were negative. I didn’t want to infect friends or family I see. That’s why we tested ourselves.

This I get. I had to fly from BDL to IAH three weeks ago and I had a cold. I tested twice before boarding and wore a mask even with negative results.

But for people who feel just fine, I don’t see a reason at this point. This is also something the flying public will pay no attention too. Even in corporate travel.

Great... this means the pointless international testing requirement for returning Americans will probably be in place for the next 12 months.

I say pointless because without the masks, you can still spread with a false negative.

The CDC is grasping at straws since they realize our legal system and structure of government can't implement sensible, less-disruptive health measures at the federal level (masks!) I hope Ed and Scott are screaming about this.

EDIT - yes, I do realize the US airline lobby was also against the sensible mask mandate... certainly barking up the wrong tree.

LAXintl wrote:

While most folks will simply ignore the recommendation, it is a sensible idea. We should not miss an opportunity to test, and do it often.

But the public health choices we've made in the US are contrary to this (seemingly sensible) position. Why shouldn't folks be testing for flu before flying in the winter if testing for communicable respiratory disease is something we value as a society?

Would love to see a testing mandate. The science is showing testing is an important mitigation tool to slow the spread and save lives. Hopefully we will see mandatory testing this fall and winter! It worked well for Hawaii travel.

Cubsrule wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

While most folks will simply ignore the recommendation, it is a sensible idea. We should not miss an opportunity to test, and do it often.

But the public health choices we've made in the US are contrary to this (seemingly sensible) position. Why shouldn't folks be testing for flu before flying in the winter if testing for communicable respiratory disease is something we value as a society?

Because the data shows COVID is an order of magnitude more impactful.

bcbhokie wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

LAXintl wrote:

While most folks will simply ignore the recommendation, it is a sensible idea. We should not miss an opportunity to test, and do it often.

But the public health choices we've made in the US are contrary to this (seemingly sensible) position. Why shouldn't folks be testing for flu before flying in the winter if testing for communicable respiratory disease is something we value as a society?

Because the data shows COVID is an order of magnitude more impactful.

That was true (and, actually, it was significantly more than an order of magnitude in most populations) before vaccines and efficacious treatments for COVID. Is it true now? I've not seen data to that effect.

jbs2886 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

bcbhokie wrote:

Because the data shows COVID is an order of magnitude more impactful.

That was true (and, actually, it was significantly more than an order of magnitude in most populations) before vaccines and efficacious treatments for COVID. Is it true now? I've not seen data to that effect.

Because if you had flu symptoms I would think it is common sense not to get on a plane? People I know that have the flu either stay home or go get tested (then stay home). Asymptomatic flu patients have much lower transmission rates. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2646474/ Only in America can testing for a communicable respiratory disease be controversial.

It's not controversial. We don't suggest testing for communicable diseases other than COVID before travel. So the question becomes whether COVID should be unique or whether we ought to test for other communicable diseases. There might be merit to broader pre-departure testing but we don't have the public health infrastructure for it, and I suspect we don't have the public appetite for it either.

The reality is that for the vast majority of vaccinated and boosted people, a COVID infection is not a big deal. And if you aren't vaccinated and choose to travel, in my view that's on you.

Note also that your article doesn't really answer the question for which you cite it:

the extent to which viral-laden aerosols are generated during tidal breathing in asymptomatic or presymptomatic, influenza-infected individuals is unclear.

. . .

More definitive influenza transmission studies are needed.

jbs2886 wrote:

Cubsrule wrote:

jbs2886 wrote:

Because if you had flu symptoms I would think it is common sense not to get on a plane? People I know that have the flu either stay home or go get tested (then stay home). Asymptomatic flu patients have much lower transmission rates. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2646474/ Only in America can testing for a communicable respiratory disease be controversial.

It's not controversial. We don't suggest testing for communicable diseases other than COVID before travel. So the question becomes whether COVID should be unique or whether we ought to test for other communicable diseases. There might be merit to broader pre-departure testing but we don't have the public health infrastructure for it, and I suspect we don't have the public appetite for it either.

The reality is that for the vast majority of vaccinated and boosted people, a COVID infection is not a big deal. And if you aren't vaccinated and choose to travel, in my view that's on you.

Unfortunately, it is controversial as evident by this thread - but those posts have been deleted (I pity the moderators when threads like this pop up). Indeed, you brought up the "public appetite," which is the point. The reality is, COVID is unique as of now and will be at least until we have more long-term data on COVID. There was a recent article discussing potentially 30%+ people that have had COVID have long-term symptoms. You can dismiss it if you want, but the fact remains we need more data.

I agree on your last point - for most of the population, COVID won't be a big deal. In fact, I fly frequently and haven't been wearing a mask (I say this to emphasize I'm not trying to be overly dramatic on the unknowns of COVID and taking extreme precautions).

Apropos of your initial comment, on Monday the FDA granted EUA for a joint COVID/flu test. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-wor ... subscriber

Seeing what happened with the very sensible federal mask mandate, I'm guessing Contitutionality/court BS would be the biggest hinderance.

They recommend testing and then what? Do we really believe that people who test positive and have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all are going to stop traveling? I don't see that happen. These recommendations are politically motivated and nothing more. If the government was serious they would mandate that every must present a test with 24 hours of traveling like they do for international flights. Until they do that, the CDC has zero credibility with me.

jbs2886 wrote:

airbazar wrote:

They recommend testing and then what? Do we really believe that people who test positive and have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all are going to stop traveling? I don't see that happen. These recommendations are politically motivated and nothing more. If the government was serious they would mandate that every must present a test with 24 hours of traveling like they do for international flights. Until they do that, the CDC has zero credibility with me.

See post above yours for why they can't mandate. Indeed, the mask mandate was struck down. What do you want CDC to do? All they can do is recommend now.

Regardless of opinion on this, its important to keep in mind what is likely to happen. In terms of mandates what is likely to happen is literally nothing.

airbazar wrote:

They recommend testing and then what? Do we really believe that people who test positive and have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all are going to stop traveling? I don't see that happen.

If one is considerate about fellow man, then yes absolutely don't travel and follow the isolation guidance. Its been well documented that asymptomatic persons still shed this virus.

Personally, it would be incredibly irresponsible to be out, let alone among hundreds if not thousands of people traveling while confirmed infected.

airbazar wrote:

They recommend testing and then what? Do we really believe that people who test positive and have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all are going to stop traveling? I don't see that happen. These recommendations are politically motivated and nothing more. If the government was serious they would mandate that every must present a test with 24 hours of traveling like they do for international flights. Until they do that, the CDC has zero credibility with me.

You just highlighted the problem: people are selfish and don't care about anybody else but themselves. If you are positive, stay home.
One day, at work, my throat had been bothering me; went to the doctor, and bingo, strep throat. I emailed HR to say I wouldn't be coming back until the day after, I did not want to "pass it on" my coworkers. Maybe it's just me, I dunno.

LAXintl wrote:

airbazar wrote:

They recommend testing and then what? Do we really believe that people who test positive and have mild symptoms or no symptoms at all are going to stop traveling? I don't see that happen.

If one is considerate about fellow man, then yes absolutely don't travel and follow the isolation guidance. Its been well documented that asymptomatic persons still shed this virus.

Personally, it would be incredibly irresponsible to be out, let alone among hundreds if not thousands of people traveling while confirmed infected.

The reality is, many are doing so, particularly those that tested positive mid-trip.

I personally know a family that was in Disney last week, the parents had mild symptoms, tested positive and still flew home from MCO on Sunday knowing they had tested positive for COVID.
These were people earlier in the pandemic that were leaving packages outside and scrubbing groceries two years ago.

The reality is, they weren't going to quarantine in Florida and have to reschedule (full) flights home, and pay $$$$$ even if they could find a place to stay in Orlando to self-quarantine mid-trip.
You can debate if this was the right thing or not to do all day long, but that is the reality of where we are with this thing in 2022.
I guarantee a lot of people are doing this every day. Not to mention the asymptomatic types.

I just had two cars shipped from FL to MA. On arrival outside my MA home, the driver of the car carrier announced that he hadn't been feeling well for several days while on the trip, and just that morning had tested positive. So I allowed my cars to sit in the sun for a couple of days. But I couldn't help think of all the people that he had been in contact with over his 4 days on the road. It's not that people are callous...just extreme Covid-19 fatigue.

Vaccinated 3 times. I have to fly multiple times a month. Testing multiple times a month just isn’t practical. And as this is just a recommendation, it’s something that I wouldn’t consider. However, if I felt poorly, I’d reschedule and not take a chance that I could spread whatever was ailing me.

This may be new, but it's nothing new. CDC has been pushing domestic testing for quite some time

Probably wouldn't accept home test results, too untrustworthy I bet the powers to be would state.

mercure1 wrote:

We probably should never miss and opportunity to test, so cant blame them offering the recomondation.

Neighbor to the North, has required COVID-19 testing to board domestic flights and trains. No test, no flight.

Which one would that be? Canada dropped all testing earlier this spring, US still has it for transborder flights. Mandatory vaccination for flights to/from/within Canada however.

You can test yourself to death. One should only test when one feels sick. Testing healthy people is pointless.

sixfootscream wrote:

You can test yourself to death. One should only test when one feels sick. Testing healthy people is pointless.

It's actually quite counterproductive akin to testing OCD

sixfootscream wrote:

You can test yourself to death. One should only test when one feels sick. Testing healthy people is pointless.

Both my grandmothers (95 and 101 years old) tested positive during a routine round of testing in their retirement homes, with ZERO symptoms.
Testing everyday is useless; but to say you need to wait to have symptoms to test is asinine, as you are contagious prior to symptoms appearing (when they do).

PSU.DTW.SCE wrote:

I personally know a family that was in Disney last week, the parents had mild symptoms, tested positive and still flew home from MCO on Sunday knowing they had tested positive for COVID.
These were people earlier in the pandemic that were leaving packages outside and scrubbing groceries two years ago.

The reality is, they weren't going to quarantine in Florida and have to reschedule (full) flights home, and pay $$$$$ even if they could find a place to stay in Orlando to self-quarantine mid-trip.
You can debate if this was the right thing or not to do all day long, but that is the reality of where we are with this thing in 2022.

All I can do is shake my head at their lack of thought about others.

When one travels, one should understand the risk including the time and financial implications testing positive away from home may entail.

sixfootscream wrote:

You can test yourself to death. One should only test when one feels sick. Testing healthy people is pointless.

Routine testing is quite effective. At my kids school last week they identified 3 positive students none with symptoms. One of my clients at LAX with 600-700 employees test weekly and is now routinely finding half a dozen if not more cases.
Removing infected persons from circulation and monitoring their close contacts helps limit potential chain of transmission.

So yes, testing travelers would certainly identify thousands that should not be flying, and instead should isolate.

LAXintl wrote:

So yes, testing travelers would certainly identify thousands that should not be flying, and instead should isolate.

Interesting point. Using the current national positivity rate of 9.8%, essentially 1 in 10 persons testing has COVID.



(source Mayo Clinic https://www.mayoclinic.org/coronavirus-covid-19/map)

If 2 million passengers go through TSA daily, there is a ton of folks that should not be anywhere near an airport!

So I am flying NYC to FLL on May 20 for a wedding. I took a PCR test on May 18 and then went to a professional event less than 10 minutes later and I immediately started feeling...not normal. Today, May 19 I am still waiting for the PCR, so decide to take a rapid test in case the PCR doesnt come (i need to test negative to attend)/. The rapid is positive and a few minutes later I get the PCR and its negative?

I cam home and did a home test and that was also positive. So I guess my status changed within a day. I just cancelled the hotel, rental car and flights since I am obviously not able to attend anymore.

All this to say, I am okay with testing for domestic travel.

It seems like people seem to think we can create a world where there is no risk. We cant and honestly we shouldnt.

Covid in its current state is simply too contagious to stop. Were all going to be exposed and there is nothing you can do about it. The people that insist life stop or things shut down typically do so because they are privileged enough to pay for home schooling for their kids and are able to work from home and give no thought to people whose livelihoods depend on actually being in the world. Its privilege packaged as virtue.

It is not feasible to test for domestic travel and it should not be mandated at all for those who feel fine. Life is full of risks. If you get in your car to drive to the store, youre taking a risk. If you just out of an airplane with no parachute, youre taking a risk. Every person must weigh the risks in front of them and decide for themselves what is worth it. Forcing mandates on the rest of the population because you want everyone else to confirm to your calculation of risks should never happen.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Would love to see a testing mandate.

Would hate to see a testing mandate.

Pi7472000 wrote:

The science is showing testing is an important mitigation tool to slow the spread and save lives.

Since the start of the pandemic world population has risen by around 200 million. From a scientific point of view, that is a much bigger problem than the six million covid deaths.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Hopefully we will see mandatory testing this fall and winter!

I spend my money on travel that doesn't require testing. Countries with testing mandates will have to wait.

LAXdude1023 wrote:

It seems like people seem to think we can create a world where there is no risk. We cant and honestly we shouldnt.

Covid in its current state is simply too contagious to stop. Were all going to be exposed and there is nothing you can do about it. The people that insist life stop or things shut down typically do so because they are privileged enough to pay for home schooling for their kids and are able to work from home and give no thought to people whose livelihoods depend on actually being in the world. Its privilege packaged as virtue.

It is not feasible to test for domestic travel and it should not be mandated at all for those who feel fine. Life is full of risks. If you get in your car to drive to the store, youre taking a risk. If you just out of an airplane with no parachute, youre taking a risk. Every person must weigh the risks in front of them and decide for themselves what is worth it. Forcing mandates on the rest of the population because you want everyone else to confirm to your calculation of risks should never happen.

100%. I fly 8-12 times a month domestically. My trips are pre planned a bit. But I know flyers that have very short notice. Luckily, it’s just a recommendation from the CDC and an individuals choice.

MartijnNL wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

Would love to see a testing mandate.

Would hate to see a testing mandate.

Pi7472000 wrote:

The science is showing testing is an important mitigation tool to slow the spread and save lives.

Since the start of the pandemic world population has risen by around 200 million. From a scientific point of view, that is a much bigger problem than the six million covid deaths.

Pi7472000 wrote:

Hopefully we will see mandatory testing this fall and winter!

I spend my money on travel that doesn't require testing. Countries with testing mandates will have to wait.

Before the effective vaccines were widely available, aI was all for testing. Now, I won't fly if testing is required.

The vaccine surplus was acknowledged in April 2021. I recall scrambling to get vaccinated in march and literally two weeks later, there was no issue getting a vaccine appointment anywhere. By my 2nd dose, the vaccine site was opperating at 25% capacity. So if someone is concerned, they were vaccinated. I know literally over 50 vaccinated who had Omicron with minor symptoms. Of the few unvaccinated who caught it, all are suffering long haul symptoms (but I know few unvaccinated).
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vacc ... us-demand/

The virus risk has been mitigated. The cost/benefit of mandatory testing makes no sense today. Spend the money on infrastructure. Business needs to restart fully and that means open travel. A bigger problem is people go out coughing and sneezing without a mask.

As already noted, this disease is too contagious to avoid. At this point, each person is responsible for mitigation of their risk. Bummer no vaccine for under age 5. I feel for the parents and kids.

Heck, too many false negatives to stop variant spread. It is my opinion people are just waking up to shortages that occured because people couldn't travel.

Will I continue to test before visiting vulnerable friends and family? Yes. My choice. I wouldn't fly if testing is required. I would bet I'm a higher yield passenger than those who want testing. I know my favorite airline has gone out of their way to express they want me back as a customer as I used to fly (including nice in person extra pre-flight service, a nice touch that kept me from even considering looking at the competition the two round trips I recently booked).

Oh, I'll wear a good mask on the flight. Again, my choice as I did my own cost/benefit analysis.

Lightsaber

LAXintl wrote:

Routine testing is quite effective. At my kids school last week they identified 3 positive students none with symptoms. One of my clients at LAX with 600-700 employees test weekly and is now routinely finding half a dozen if not more cases.
Removing infected persons from circulation and monitoring their close contacts helps limit potential chain of transmission.

So yes, testing travelers would certainly identify thousands that should not be flying, and instead should isolate.

That's not effective. That's highly counterproductive.

Unless you believe there should be mass routine testing for the flu, cold viruses, RSV and many other viruses. A lot of people would often test positive for either one of those. We have immune systems. They work really well. It's time to getting back to that.