Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Destinations > Americas > Canada
Reload this Page >

Canada Will Require Negative COVID-19 Test 72 Hours Before Arrival

Canada Will Require Negative COVID-19 Test 72 Hours Before Arrival

Old Dec 30, 2020, 7:10 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: PDX
Programs: DL DM, AS MVP 100K, Amtrak peon, Colbert Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 4,534
Originally Posted by YOWgary
For something like this, I'm glad to have as much warning as possible. I've got a team of people working an unspecified large sporting event in a few weeks, and I now need to find a company that can meet them at their hotel for rapid testing so they can fly home when the job's done.
Nope. Has to be a PCR test. The only hope I could see is if authorities consider the NAAT type (as opposed to molecular antigen type) of rapid tests as equivalent to PCR. That would solve a lot of problems with the 72-hour requirement. But if the final rule is that it must be lab-based, youd have to find another solution.
GoAmtrak is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 7:20 pm
  #47  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Paris
Programs: AA LT Plat (4m+), AF Plat, A3 Gold, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat/Ambassador
Posts: 2,645
Originally Posted by expert7700
This will be some wake-up call go the crowds of people who flocked from YYZ to Sun destinations on boxing day. Can't imagine getting an accepted negative Covid test 3 days before leaving Mexico or an Island.


​​​​​​
you can definitely get them in less than 72hrs... there are private clinics in most of these locations that will do so for a fee...
bostontraveler is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 7:24 pm
  #48  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Paris
Programs: AA LT Plat (4m+), AF Plat, A3 Gold, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Plat, IHG Plat/Ambassador
Posts: 2,645
[QUOTE=Lomapaseo;32925269]
Originally Posted by kevflyer
As reported by Richard Zussman, GlobalBC reporter.
Travelers will still have to quarantine for 14 days.
Currently unclear when this starts.

I don't understand the thread title

Is that a minimum or maximum or fixed time requirement?

This whole risk management subject is way too confusing and made up on the fly

Even now we are going to add yet another complicated subject by introducing a what-if hail-mary fix by virtue of a two step vaccine which may or may not protect persons, again within a an unproven time frame.

This convince me that the issue is manufactured to suit the news du jour to calm the ignorant public and make themselves look good by doing something.
I agree that governments have been sloppy when it comes to the details of these new requirements. Particularly those which don't specify whether it's 72 hours prior to arrival or departure. In my book I assume from arrival.
bostontraveler is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 7:36 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: YVR, HNL
Programs: AS 75k, UA peon, BA Bronze, AC E50k, Marriott Plat, HH Diamond, Fairmont Plat (RIP)
Posts: 7,818
Originally Posted by GoAmtrak
Nope. Has to be a PCR test. The only hope I could see is if authorities consider the NAAT type (as opposed to molecular antigen type) of rapid tests as equivalent to PCR. That would solve a lot of problems with the 72-hour requirement. But if the final rule is that it must be lab-based, youd have to find another solution.
The Abbott ID Now rapid test is a PCR test. My result came in about 15 minutes and it clearly states on my results Rapid Covid 19 PCR test.
Transpacificflyer likes this.
Finkface is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 7:48 pm
  #50  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: PDX
Programs: DL DM, AS MVP 100K, Amtrak peon, Colbert Lifetime Platinum
Posts: 4,534
Originally Posted by Finkface
The Abbott ID Now rapid test is a PCR test. My result came in about 15 minutes and it clearly states on my results Rapid Covid 19 PCR test.
As I said, the magic words lab-based would render NAAT tests like Abbott ID Now as ineligible. My results from ID Now made no mention of PCR, just NAAT. Its the same mechanism of detection as PCR, but the point-of-care processing is what makes it less accurate and causes more false negatives than lab processing. The devil will be in the details which are sorely lacking right now.
GoAmtrak is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 8:42 pm
  #51  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC*SE 2MM
Posts: 16,579
Originally Posted by tcook052
This is all about responding to the political posturing of Doug Ford and Francois Legault. The Federal Liberals were put in a politically impossible position if they didn't respond to this idiotic demand. Let's think this through the implications of this:
  • As pointed out above, only 2% of COVID cases are imported from abroad. A negative test 72 hours before departure tells us that you probably didn't have active COVID 3 days before departure but it doesn't mean you didn't catch it in your ensuing three days or that you weren't too early for it to be picked up by the test. the typical Canadian on a one-week holiday who catches COVID on day 1 of their holiday and gets tested on day 4 will not yet test positive. The implication is that the majority of Canadians who catch COVID while abroad will "pass" this test and still bring it home with them. We might shave half a percent off our total COVID numbers.
  • Despite government exhortation and legal requirements, people who test negative for COVID are far more likely to "cheat" on the 14-day quarantine since they "know" they are healthy. This will result in more COVID cases than the rule will prevent.
  • This requirement will put a significant strain on healthcare systems in under-developed countries who will now have to devote scarce medical resources and tests to testing Canadian tourists rather than testing their own population. Canada will contribute to the further spread of COVID in those countries in the name of protecting itself.
  • In order to get tested, Canadian abroad will have to go to clinics to get tested. By doing so, they are exposing themselves to needless risk of COVID and other infections (after all most people go to clinics because they are sick).
  • The requirement for PCR testing is needlessly restrictive. Canada has a love affair with PCR and while it is good, it is expensive, the results take time and it is difficult to get in some locations. A couple of months ago, Ontario was taking 5 days to provide the results of a PCR test. Ontario is almost certainly not unique in the world. People will likely try to get their test done as far in advance as possible. a PCR test done 72 hours prior to arrival is probably going to pick up fewer COVID people than a slightly less accurate antigen test taken at an airport just prior to departure (or better yet upon arrival).
  • Other countries may choose to retaliate and impose the same requirement on people returning from Canada. This would further strain our already taxed testing system.
  • The majority of travellers will almost certainly remain exempt from this requirement. Why a trucker travelling from Mexico through the US to Canada is assumed to be clean while someone who travels abroad, even to a country with lower COVID prevalence than Canada is presumed to need a test is not exactly "following science" as our government so proudly proclaims.
Expensive, inconvenient window dressing that will make more people sick. Well done Canada!
The Lev is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 9:04 pm
  #52  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
delete

Last edited by skybluesea; Dec 30, 2020 at 9:17 pm
skybluesea is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 9:23 pm
  #53  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: YYC
Programs: AC SE MM
Posts: 602
Originally Posted by skybluesea
Now that the Canadian government has acknowledged its gross negligence in managing arriving international travel, I agree that this is a fig leaf that delivers little benefit for the disruption caused.
There is little evidence that a significant % of recent covid in Canada is due to International arrivals.

Rather, there is strong evidence the majority is community spread.

Last edited by tcook052; Dec 30, 2020 at 10:06 pm Reason: Off topic
mountainboy is online now  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 9:40 pm
  #54  
m.y
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: YYZ
Programs: AC 75k, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 1,153
Originally Posted by mountainboy
There is little evidence that a significant % of recent covid in Canada is due to International arrivals.

Rather, there is strong evidence the majority is community spread.
Quarantine and other measures to contain traveler spread is only one of the tools to contain the pandemic. Yes governments will need to impose measures to contain community spread, but those measures would be pointless if new cases are brought in unchecked from outside.

Yes, the current proposal is far from perfect, you can get COVID after the initial test. There should be mandatory testing a week after arrival, and strict quarantine checks, whether it's mandatory app with gps tracking, or centralized quarantine facilities or more frequent spot checks.

Last edited by tcook052; Dec 30, 2020 at 10:07 pm Reason: edit quote
m.y is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 9:52 pm
  #55  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: *G^2, Bonvoyed, NEXUS
Posts: 3,497
This is really just politics over science at this point because some people are upset of seeing videos of people at the airports. I feel if they wanted a testing requirement, it should have been introduced 6 months ago.

I want to know about transit, in 3 scenarios:

1. International to International
2. International to US (especially as this is now entering Canada and then proceeding to US departures as the US transfer path is not always open anymore)
3. International to International with a domestic connection in between (i.e. Canadian citizen, flying Country A - Canada City A - Canada City B - Country B).

Also does the test have to be from the country you are embarking from? Can you use the same test for multiple entries within the validity period.

Asking all of this for a friend of course...
jackmaninov and oreomilkshake like this.
D582 is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 10:51 pm
  #56  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: YOW
Programs: AC SE, FOTSG Platinum
Posts: 5,707
Originally Posted by The Lev
This is all about responding to the political posturing of Doug Ford and Francois Legault.
I disagree - it's at least as much about being seen to be doing something about "UK strain" COVID coming into the country, and to me, to a lesser extent it's simply the only way the federal government can express ITS covid-fatigue.

The phrasing chosen in today's announcement was pretty telling; that both ministers talked about the fact that they can't ban foreign travel, and asking people to do the right thing hasn't worked, so now they're putting up whatever additional roadblocks the law DOES permit.


Originally Posted by The Lev
As pointed out above, only 2% of COVID cases are imported from abroad. A negative test 72 hours before departure tells us that you probably didn't have active COVID 3 days before departure but it doesn't mean you didn't catch it in your ensuing three days or that you weren't too early for it to be picked up by the test. the typical Canadian on a one-week holiday who catches COVID on day 1 of their holiday and gets tested on day 4 will not yet test positive.
Again, today's announcements seemed to me to imply that this was more about erecting barriers to people travelling, period, than it was about catching COVID cases.

Originally Posted by The Lev
The requirement for PCR testing is needlessly restrictive. Canada has a love affair with PCR
Canada is hardly alone in the world for PCR being the chosen test for people flying into the country. I'm only mostly sure that the great majority of nations with a COVID-test requirement at the border, require a PCR test, but certainly it's among the most common.

Originally Posted by The Lev
and while it is good, it is expensive, the results take time and it is difficult to get in some locations.
I really get the sense from today's announcement that Health Canada sees both of these things as useful, in a policy that they're openly saying is designed in part to encourage Canadians to cancel or postpone their travel plans.
m.y likes this.
YOWgary is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 11:21 pm
  #57  
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 366
Originally Posted by YOWgary
I disagree - it's at least as much about being seen to be doing something about "UK strain" COVID coming into the country, and to me, to a lesser extent it's simply the only way the federal government can express ITS covid-fatigue.

The phrasing chosen in today's announcement was pretty telling; that both ministers talked about the fact that they can't ban foreign travel, and asking people to do the right thing hasn't worked, so now they're putting up whatever additional roadblocks the law DOES permit.
But during the same announcement, Public Safety Minister also announced they are exploring implementing a border pilot program at YYZ. Why have incentives to reduce quarantine times if they don't want people to travel?
LETTERBOY and YYCCL3 like this.
On Time Reports is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 11:30 pm
  #58  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YVR
Programs: Air Canada Super Elite 2+ Million Miles
Posts: 2,478
Originally Posted by tracon
The Canadian government will deny entry to it's own citizens? I didn't think that was allowed.
Or is the onus being put on the airline, therefore it's denied boarding rather than denied entry?
NO, citizens have an absolute right of entry, and thus a citizen that arrives at a port of entry on a private conveyance (vessel, vehicle, aircraft, on foot, dog sled, etc.) cannot be barred entry...what happens when someone does this without PCR test, well, need to see the OIC.

Citizens do NOT have any statutory right to board a commercial aircraft destined for Canada WITHOUT meeting the conditions of carriage, and specifically the carriage for any international airline serving Canada will have some language that says the traveler must comply with the laws of the land, and that the airline can deny boarding if the traveler does NOT comply.

Plus, the obligation rests SOLELY with the traveler to demonstrate to the airline that the traveler is in full compliance based on whatever standard established by the GoC. For airlines, this creates an enormous risk that front-line staff, often contracted in some far flung place across the planet get this wrong, and permits boarding in error. Again, the OIC may say what the fines for the airlines might be, or maybe just fall into the standing penalties for airlines that deliver non-compliant travelers, plus removal costs.

And this gets worse as this situation would NOT be considered DENIED BOARDING - since the traveler is NON-compliant with the laws of Canada, the airline has every right to say "go away until you comply".

The Public Safety Act has powerful tools to ensure commercial transport operators comply through serious fines, and even jail sentences for conviction in some cases.

In sum, basically the Government of Canada will enforce compliance by proxy through commercial transport operators.

Last edited by skybluesea; Dec 31, 2020 at 12:05 am Reason: plus
skybluesea is offline  
Old Dec 30, 2020, 11:59 pm
  #59  
Moderator, Air Canada; FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: YYC
Programs: AC SE MM, FB Plat, WS Plat, BA Silver, DL GM, Marriott Plat, Hilton Gold, Accor Silver
Posts: 16,622
Originally Posted by YOWgary
For something like this, I'm glad to have as much warning as possible. I've got a team of people working an unspecified large sporting event in a few weeks, and I now need to find a company that can meet them at their hotel for rapid testing so they can fly home when the job's done.
I'm not opposed to giving some notice before it gets implemented, but it reeks of disorganization to announce a vague policy and say you'll announce the rest tomorrow. It's not like this is going to take weeks to develop.

Originally Posted by On Time Reports
But during the same announcement, Public Safety Minister also announced they are exploring implementing a border pilot program at YYZ. Why have incentives to reduce quarantine times if they don't want people to travel?
Very well said.
tcook052 and D582 like this.
Adam Smith is offline  
Old Dec 31, 2020, 2:42 am
  #60  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 6,384
all about the optics... yipee
yerffej201 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.