Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
I have a problem with requiring testing unless the test results can and will be used to guide treatment or otherwise benefit the patient. IMO it's OK to test when someone is being admitted to the hospital so that one knows whether PPE is required and whether the person should be put into a ward with other COVID-19 cases, but for mild symptoms, the best medical advice is simply to self quarantine and perhaps take some OTC medicines to relieve symptoms.
Testing everyone, whether for asymptomatic infection or acquired immunity, is the equivalent of asking everyone to be a human subject with no Institutional Review Board approval procedures, no informed consent, and no possible compensation.
Similarly, those here who are suggesting that all airline passengers (and crew, I would hope) be tested should ask themselves whether they would want TSA or most countries' low-level airport employees to perform somewhat invasive and unpleasant medical procedures, including drawing blood from a huge number of healthy-appearing individuals. For instance, think how difficult it is to get a TSA employee to put on clean gloves before doing a pat-down search or touching and digging through carry on items that will later be handled or worn by the passenger.
There is a difference between testing for treatment, and testing for epidemiological purposes.
On a philosophical and for debating purpose: As for testing the entire population, that will depend on the policy makers of the US if we ever come to that point for any communicable disease. Think, what if the Coronavirus was rather a hemorrhagic fever pathogen with a 3 week incubation period and a mortality rate between Coronavirus and less than Ebola? The entire world would be crippled for a very long time. We are quite lucky in that sense. The social distancing policy mandated by governors to close non-essential business in my opinion, is more intrusive to an individual than what the Coronavirus swab test will ever cause. The individual's benefit or harm is no longer considered when the greater good of society outweighs the individual's in situation like the current pandemic. Otherwise, mass mandates will never work. If people are willing to give up their paychecks for the greater good of the community during shut downs, then I doubt people would care much about personal health care privacy issues at hand for a coronavirus test that requires swabbing only, without a venous puncture.
As for going back on topic, I can see travelers having to show proof of negative Coronavirus testing before traveling or crossing borders. If domestically in the US, we are requiring a 14 day quarantine due to inter-state flying, how can we assume foreign countries wouldn't require even a more drastic disease free burden of proof before entering their countries? It will be interesting to see how opening borders will happen between all of the countries again. The US has the highest number of cases, and US travelers will probably have the highest restrictions before entering another country.
Travel will not be the same anymore until the profits come back for the airline industry. There won't be the same level of luxury soft products for a long time when airline companies are trying to financially survive. When people are losing jobs and wages, what matters in life will not be: the latest and greatest first class soft product, frequent flier miles, points, achieving the highest level of loyalty program, or the latest Instagram location. Unless you are on FlyerTalk. Drastic cuts to what we have been accustomed to will be the norm (ie. lounges, fast customer service....etc).