Hacker News Reader

Comment by Renaud | Hacker News Reader

A pre-departure COVID test should be required for all flights. With the rate of spread in the US, the risk of having infected -and probably asymptomatic- people on board is not negligible.

Having to stay in closed quarters, breathing the same air, going to the same toilets, wearing the same mask, with a good portion or people not caring much for all the extra measures and who will probably find ways to defy the order to wear masks properly, well, that doesn't seem a particularly way to fly.

A test within 3 days before departure would at least give a chance to temporarily prevent someone from infecting others.

Some countries already require the test before entering their borders but as a airline, I would expect that to be enforced before departure, for all flights.

View on HN

testing is 70% accurate. incubation period is long.

as such, visitors should: 1. take a test when they land 2. quarantine 3. take another test

that's how some countries have approached this "test at the airport" strategy.

basically provide negative results over a set period of quarantine, as i read it.

This is how it is in my country now. Previously it was recommended to quarantine yourself when travelling from certain countries (US included), but was not mandatory. They changed that two weeks ago after an asymptomatic traveller from the US spend the weekend partying at various bars the whole weekend, then came down with symptoms the following week.

The policy here in New Zealand is that ALL travelers must quarantine in a managed facility for 14 days after arrival.

COVID tests on day 3 and day 12.

Reports have indicated that a fair number of people appear symptom free, but then test positive on day 3.

Of the people that test negative on day 3, some then later test positive on day 12. I'd imagine this percentage would be even higher if they did the first test on day 1

Goes to show that if we just did a single test we'd be allowing enough COVID positive people through the gates to re-ignite the pandemic. You need multiple tests over a time period

The next problem is the testing infrastructure. Few labs (if any) do PCR tests with results guaranteed in the next 72h in major US cities.

What if test results are late? Should you delay and take the first flight after getting the results? Now the test was taken 4 days or more before the new flight. Should You take another test?

Airlines or countries that do not want to welcome travelers without a recent, <72h PCR test should set up the necessary infrastructure in the city of the departure airport.

Seems like a perfectly fine way to realign incentives a bit!

If you need a recent test result before entering an airport, you'll have airlines screaming to get some of that test infrastructure in place yesterday.

what you described is the problem and responsibility of the individual. i don't see why it should be at the departure airport, that is an unnecessary scaling issue for countries/airlines.

make it at the arrival airport, if the traveler doesn't have a valid recent test, he can take it again at the arrival airport + mandatory quarantine (and by that i mean in a nearby facility escorted by police). If you want to travel, it should be your responsibility to not infect everyone else...

There are tests that come back in 90 minutes now. If the testing infrastructure is not up to par, and it certainly isn't, then people don't fly. Very simple. This isn't a game. I'd hope that we'd have sorted our testing out by now but that looks like it won't be sorted out this year at all and possibly never. If countries don't want coronas coming to them, they should just ban flights from the US. Otherwise, they should accept that they will be infected. Once again, very simple.

This is exactly what I've been advocating for as well. Does anyone know why this change isn't being made? Seems like a pretty good middle ground between ensuring safety, while continuing to offer flights around the world. Is it due to the challenge with getting scheduled appointments for being tested beforehand?

Edit: Just wanted to add that some airlines have already mandated testing before boarding, such as Emirates and I'm sure others.

We should be doing in flight testing.

PCR the cabin air and the waste stream.

Swab everyone and group test them. Then if there's a positive you hold everyone and retest them individually.

Given that the tests take days to come back, this would imply at minimum a need for in-flight refueling and lots of extra galley supplies. Between that and the space taken up by a PCR lab, I doubt there'd be many revenue seats left.

Better to just not put anyone on the aircraft at all, I think. Especially since in-flight refueling of airliners isn't actually a thing that can happen.

The PCR alone takes a couple of hours to run. Labs have significant turn around time because they're taking samples from various testing locations and running them centrally. Plus hardly anyone is running group testing. You swab everyone at boarding and run the test near the airport. For a transatlantic flight, the lab work will beat the plane every time. If you want to add on environmental testing we're looking at a quarantine several hours long at the point of arrival. There's growing evidence that saliva testing is reliable, so the procedure can be far less invasive than nasopharyngeal swabs.

And, yes, I agree. There are very few reasons anyone should be flying right now, mostly limited to "I need to be in place X or I will die."

This is what China asks for all arrival, but many places might not be able get PCR test results within the timeslot.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com