Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > Airlines and Mileage Programs > Air Canada | Aeroplan
Reload this Page >

AC partners with McMaster HealthLabs & GTAA on Volunteer COVID Testing at YYZ

AC partners with McMaster HealthLabs & GTAA on Volunteer COVID Testing at YYZ

Old Sep 4, 20, 12:04 pm
  #16  
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Vancouver
Programs: BA, Alaska, AA, KLM, Delta
Posts: 479
Only.if YYZ is your destination

Arrived internationally from TLV on way to YVR...told I do not qualify
testycal is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 1:30 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Grounded until Q3 2021
Programs: Build a RoboCop Statue in Detroit
Posts: 2,705
Masks have been mandatory on Air Canada since April and we still see the infections spreading. Air filtering doesn't help when one is exposed to an infected person in an adjacent seat for 1 hour plus. Ask an infectious disease expert if h/she would sit next to an infected passenger. In an ideal world, testing would get rid of some of these people before they got on the aircraft. Until then, IMO the strategy is to hush up the extent of the problem.

Originally Posted by Yul_voyager View Post
It is not voluntary, it is mandatory, although it is a self-isolation generally at home so it is possible it is not respected by everyone.
Do you really believe that the majority of travelers are compliant with the regulations? Sure they are mandatory, but there is no enforcement. The karaoke bar incident you referenced was an example of non compliance. Many airline passengers are no different. We saw from the return of travelers in March and April that compliance was poor. The reason why the Canadian government put so many people into government paid isolation facilities is because they knew people were not compliant. The emphasis for testing had its start at that time because it had been hoped that passengers could be tested upon arrival. Testing is just not fast enough and passengers won't accept delays.

The current format of testing will allow for the collection of data to see if the tests even work, but it's a backwards approach to the problem. I am all for testing, but this is smoke and mirrors. The airline industry is trying to get out in front of a crisis that will explode once the general public understands the large number of infections that attach to international flight arrivals. I get it, that it will be impossible to do anything about the domestic flight risk. Testing may help.

The winter international travel season is desperately needed by the airlines so they will use whatever gimmick they can to buy time or to convince the public that flying is safe. We will soon see the suggestion of travel bubbles to designated safe countries, with passengers flown there courtesy of Canadian airlines.
A testing program will support the undertaking.

This forum is a hostile audience when it comes to any hint of a curtailment of flying. Unfortunately, that curtailment on international flights will come if the ineffective screening and isolation enforcement in Canada is not addressed. If you want to see how a proper testing international travel program works, look at Thailand. Mandatory test prior to flight, mandatory 14 day isolation at an approved supervised facility and mandatory testing at the end of the isolation. Canadians won't accept that. The testing should have been initiated months ago. People forget, but the airlines were opposed to testing and other screening measures when they were first suggested. We can thank the airline employee unions for many of the current enhanced hygiene measures and the unions were asking for screening tests months ago.

Last edited by tcook052; Sep 5, 20 at 11:33 am Reason: off topic
Transpacificflyer is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 3:41 pm
  #18  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Quebec and Ontario, Canada
Programs: AC*E50, SPG/Marriott Plat
Posts: 1,714
Originally Posted by Transpacificflyer View Post
You want to use Science based facts. Fine. You see how 1 infected person in a bar resulted in 50 infections. How about you take a conservative factor and apply it to the 36+ domestic flights? How about 30, or 20 or even 10. There is a strong likelihood that other people were infected when there was an infected airline passenger.
So we have evidence that one single case resulted in 50 infections (and counting) in a Karaoke bar where nobody care about any social distancing, mask, and were doing high risk activity (singing).
As far as I know, there is no evidence of anyone infected in a flight. Please provide me a link if I am wrong. You believe, as the virus is very contagious, that there should be 10 or 30 resulting infections in flights for every positive person who board but this is very unlikely, because no one has never been found.
You ask me if I would seat for +1 hours next to a sick person ? Certainly not. But I can manage the risk to seat near a person who wear a mask, has not been tested positive recently, has no obvious symptom, no fever, and has as much chance as anyone in the country I am living in to carry the virus, especially in an environment when the air is filtered every 3 minutes.
By the way, what is the difference between a domestic flight and an international flight coming from a country with the same or a lower infection rate as we have in Canada (except maybe a longer flight time) ?
canadiancow likes this.
Yul_voyager is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 3:57 pm
  #19  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: YYC
Programs: AC SE
Posts: 485
Originally Posted by Yul_voyager View Post
By the way, what is the difference between a domestic flight and an international flight coming from a country with the same or a lower infection rate as we have in Canada (except maybe a longer flight time) ?
And if domestic flights are same (low) risk as international flights, then what about a cross-town commute on public transport in a Canadian city?

How dare the cities get their public transport back up and running! My guess is buses and trains have not been majorly implicated in infectiousness.
Never mind people get on/off the bus without any contact tracing....
Yul_voyager and canadiancow like this.
mountainboy is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 6:21 pm
  #20  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Programs: AC*S100K MM, Carlson Gold Elite, Hilton Gold, Fairmont Platinum
Posts: 74
Although it's sad that it's left up to the airline to fund a program like this, I certainly appreciate the effort. And if this is going to push the government to start looking at rapid testing as a more surgical approach to dealing with the long-term effects of the pandemic, that's great. I also think it's pretty classy that they're offering some goodies for volunteers (a discount code, Crave, Pressreader). Although you'll be stuck at home unable to use the discount code, access to otherwise paid for TV, newspapers and magazines will come in handy during your 336 hours of forced isolation. Don't think it was expected, but nice nonetheless.
canadiancow likes this.
nm761 is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 6:25 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: YQB
Programs: AC E75K
Posts: 1,984
Originally Posted by Yul_voyager View Post
So we have evidence that one single case resulted in 50 infections (and counting) in a Karaoke bar where nobody care about any social distancing, mask, and were doing high risk activity (singing).
As far as I know, there is no evidence of anyone infected in a flight. Please provide me a link if I am wrong. You believe, as the virus is very contagious, that there should be 10 or 30 resulting infections in flights for every positive person who board but this is very unlikely, because no one has never been found.
You ask me if I would seat for +1 hours next to a sick person ? Certainly not. But I can manage the risk to seat near a person who wear a mask, has not been tested positive recently, has no obvious symptom, no fever, and has as much chance as anyone in the country I am living in to carry the virus, especially in an environment when the air is filtered every 3 minutes.
By the way, what is the difference between a domestic flight and an international flight coming from a country with the same or a lower infection rate as we have in Canada (except maybe a longer flight time) ?
I will point you to this study: https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/11/20-3353_article
jasdou is offline  
Old Sep 4, 20, 6:42 pm
  #22  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Quebec and Ontario, Canada
Programs: AC*E50, SPG/Marriott Plat
Posts: 1,714
Originally Posted by jasdou View Post
Thanks for the study, I agree, this is a possible, even probable case of someone infected during a flight. That's said, if we look at the detailed number, they were 299 passengers, with 6 asymptomatic cases (which were most certainly contaminated in Italia before the flight) and it resulted to one single person contaminated - and likely by touching a contaminated surface... This actually reinforce the idea that the risk of flying is pretty low. Probably way lower than a lot of day to day activity and not something significant in the daily cases...
Yul_voyager is offline  
Old Sep 5, 20, 1:23 am
  #23  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, Bonvoy Tit, HH Diamond, Hyatt Disc, Accor Gold, UA Silver
Posts: 34,546
Originally Posted by jasdou View Post
On the flight from Milan, Italy, to South Korea, she wore an N95 mask, except when she used a toilet. The toilet was shared by passengers sitting nearby, including an asymptomatic patient.


So uh... Maybe don't take your mask off when you're in the one room that people intentionally deposit bodily fluids?
D582 likes this.
canadiancow is online now  
Old Sep 5, 20, 3:23 am
  #24  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 1,405
Originally Posted by Transpacificflyer View Post
. The airline industry is trying to get out in front of a crisis that will explode once the general public understands the large number of infections that attach to international flight arrivals.
Would you mind sharing with everyone where we can find evidence of the large number of infections that attach to international flight arrivals?
D582, Yul_voyager and canadiancow like this.
YYCCL3 is offline  
Old Sep 5, 20, 7:43 am
  #25  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,494
We know ways it spreads more (singing and yelling being one of them - hence the karaoke bar situation). So perhaps we can open up in smart ways and help the economy recover while minimizing the damage virus does. Have I flown since the pandemic started? Yes. Did I take precautions? Yes. Mask on, sanitize like crazy, and avoid using the bathroom. I did my quarantine time when I returned to Canada. Let's look at a reasonable middle ground, as opposed to the two extremes. I would like to see Canada require a false COVID test before you are allowed to board (usually 5 days or 48 hours before departure). There are also 15 minute saliva tests now. If Canada required them before check-in from high risk passengers that would make sense as well.
m.y, D582, Yul_voyager and 1 others like this.

Last edited by tcook052; Sep 5, 20 at 11:39 am Reason: Off topic
quantumofforce is offline  
Old Sep 5, 20, 4:02 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Grounded until Q3 2021
Programs: Build a RoboCop Statue in Detroit
Posts: 2,705
Originally Posted by YYCCL3 View Post
Would you mind sharing with everyone where we can find evidence of the large number of infections that attach to international flight arrivals?
The following response has been edited to avoid being labeled as '"off topic". The complete response has been provided to the questioner.

For the period of August 21 to August 30; 37 international flights entered Canada carrying one or more confirmed infected people. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-heal...html#wb-auto-6 There were most likely pax who are infected but undetected, but I will ignore that reality to avoid a disagreement here.
For example, on the Air Canada AC1255 Kingston (KIN) to Toronto (YYZ) flight of 24 August we know that there were a minimum of 2 confirmed infected passengers.

From these two infected passengers we can reliably extrapolate how many people will be directly infected and indirectly infected. There is a substantial body of research pre Covid19 that shows this. In respect to a SARS related virus, the classic illustration from the SARS crisis of 2003 shows: On a March 2003 flight from HKG to PEK, one solitary passenger on the 3 hour flight infected 18 passengers and 2 FAs. 1/2 the victims were seated within 2 rows of this person. The other 1/2 were more than 2 rows away. There are other studies which show similar impact.

Therefore, it is likely that these 37 international flights will be implicated in hundreds of infections.

Last edited by tcook052; Sep 5, 20 at 5:37 pm
Transpacificflyer is offline  
Old Sep 6, 20, 10:47 pm
  #27  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: AS MVP Gold / Marriott Bonvoy(age) Titanium Elite, IHG Platinum, WN A+/CP, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 337
Originally Posted by Transpacificflyer View Post
The following response has been edited to avoid being labeled as '"off topic". The complete response has been provided to the questioner.

For the period of August 21 to August 30; 37 international flights entered Canada carrying one or more confirmed infected people. https://www.canada.ca/en/public-heal...html#wb-auto-6 There were most likely pax who are infected but undetected, but I will ignore that reality to avoid a disagreement here.
For example, on the Air Canada AC1255 Kingston (KIN) to Toronto (YYZ) flight of 24 August we know that there were a minimum of 2 confirmed infected passengers.

From these two infected passengers we can reliably extrapolate how many people will be directly infected and indirectly infected. There is a substantial body of research pre Covid19 that shows this. In respect to a SARS related virus, the classic illustration from the SARS crisis of 2003 shows: On a March 2003 flight from HKG to PEK, one solitary passenger on the 3 hour flight infected 18 passengers and 2 FAs. 1/2 the victims were seated within 2 rows of this person. The other 1/2 were more than 2 rows away. There are other studies which show similar impact.

Therefore, it is likely that these 37 international flights will be implicated in hundreds of infections.
Please read this post as someone who is an expat living in SFO and has lost a parent in the middle of this pandemic in YOW.

I applaud AC actually pushing research on this topic.

Its about the basic loss of freedom....we have to move forward people.....AC is helping with that.....if this study shows a quarantine is not necessary in lieu of testing....Canada should move thier policy.....

Last edited by tcook052; Sep 7, 20 at 6:57 am Reason: off topic
isaac.chambers is offline  
Old Sep 6, 20, 11:57 pm
  #28  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: ZRH
Programs: AC SE 100K
Posts: 584
Originally Posted by Yul_voyager View Post
Good initiative but I don't think that will help to change the government approach for the 14 days quarantine. The government couldn't care less about the facts (otherwise, how could one explains that the rules are exactly the same no matter where you come from, if the origin has 10 times less cases or 20 times more cases than in Canada). They are going to keep the 14 days quarantine anyway because 1- they want to discourage travel as much as possible and 2- they want to show they are tough on travelers (since most Canadians don't travel internationally I am pretty sure a majority of people agree with the 14 days quarantine - basic politics).
Emphasis added - "since most Canadians don't travel internationally I am pretty sure a majority of people agree with the 14 days quarantine - basic politics" . . . What's amazing is how in favour Canadians are at keeping the quarantine in place. It affects a small percentage of the population and also - there are so few stories in the news which support the other side. I guess Canadians - living in such a big country - don't feel closed in.

The quarantine period is not going to be lifted until the pandemic is over and health officials are on record as saying this. I don't think they want a solution or any exemptions because people are adamantly opposed to the quarantine.
YYCCL3 likes this.
zrh2yvr is offline  
Old Sep 7, 20, 3:03 am
  #29  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SFO
Programs: AC SE MM, Bonvoy Tit, HH Diamond, Hyatt Disc, Accor Gold, UA Silver
Posts: 34,546
Originally Posted by isaac.chambers View Post
if this study shows a quarantine is not necessary in lieu of testing....Canada should move thier policy.....
Emphasis on "if". This isn't "let's go back to normal", it's "let's actually collect data so we can properly analyze the impact of international travel".

There is way too much fear-mongering. Collect the data. Analyze it. Don't just make stupid decisions.

If you're fine having someone fly YYC-YVR without a quarantine but not SYD-YVR, you've demonstrated a complete and utter lack of logic and health safety.

An origin-risk-based quarantine might make sense. A blanket quarantine for all flights would make more sense than the current rules. But the current rules are illogical and either useless or unsafe (or both), and that can't be fixed without collecting data.
Yul_voyager likes this.

Last edited by tcook052; Sep 7, 20 at 7:00 am Reason: off topic
canadiancow is online now  
Old Sep 7, 20, 4:08 am
  #30  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: YYF/YCG/YXC
Programs: AS MVP/AC E50K/SPG-Marriott Lifetime Titanium E/Accor-FPC Gold/IHG Plat/HHDiamond/Hyatt Discoverist
Posts: 4,975
Having been tested multiple times of late, here are my thoughts.

Back in July at a drive-thru testing site I was given a throat swab and the negative test results took four days

Over the past two weeks, due to my travel history, I have been tested twice upon arrival at FCO courtesy of the local Lazio region with immediate results in 30 mins.

Canada needs to step up the testing upon arrival at all four airports receiving international arrivals and retesting those same people four or five days later.
Yul_voyager and canadiancow like this.
PointWeasel is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: