CDC pre-departure lawsuit cases updates?
May 4, 2022, 8:04 am
#46
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
I could've sworn there were a couple of state AG lawsuits involving the testing requirement. But I must be remembering wrong as I can't find anything. There are/were state suits about the mask mandate. I was hoping state AGs would have a better chance at success than the DIYers in the case above.
It is what it is.
May 4, 2022, 8:06 am
#47
Join Date: Mar 2012
Programs: Lame Duck Delta PM, Freshly Minted AA EXP
Posts: 234
I understand the point about other events taking up all the oxygen in the room for the administration, but the media is tied up as well. Seems a good time to drop the testing requirement and not receive much attention for doing so. I know, not likely, but a man can dream, can't he?
May 4, 2022, 8:22 am
#48
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
And the argument the USG will use is implicit in the following paragraph and is nothing new to the pandemic:
A guaranteed right to enter the country of citizenship is not the same as a guaranteed entitlement to fly by common carrier means so as to exercise that right to enter the country of citizenship. I am both amused and disappointed by all these criticisms of "illegal" testing requirements to fly to the US when: a) so many of these very people have mostly been silent when the US Government put in place the US's WHTI requirement to generally have a passport to fly to the US even when it comes to US citizens; and b) so many of these very people have mostly been silent when the USG started with using no-fly lists and US passport denial lists against free US citizens so as to prevent some Americans from flying back to the US by common carriers despite these very Americans too having a right to enter the US as citizens of the US. They just needed to be able to make it to a US port of entry in order to exercise their inalienable right to re-enter the country of citizenship.
For much of the life of many of the Americans on FT, we've been able to fly internationally to the US on some routes without even having a passport. Not any more. For most of the life of most Americans on FT, we've been able to fly internationally to the US without having to meet a Covid-19 testing requirement to fly to the US but still have had to meet other USG requirements to be able to fly on common carriers to reach a country to which we have a right to entry on arrival that is far more widely protected by the body of US law than the ability to fly internationally to the US on common carriers.
If it's acceptable for the US to deny US citizens the right to fly back on common carriers to the US without a passport or passport-replacing document, and if it's acceptable to use the no-fly-lists to prevent any US citizens from flying backing to the US, then it shouldn't be a surprise that the slippery slope led to the US prohibiting even more US citizens from flying back on common carriers to the US during a public health emergency.
Last edited by GUWonder; May 4, 2022 at 8:29 am
May 4, 2022, 9:12 am
#49
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
As to COVID itself, the concept of long COVID is a bit of a red herring. I do think the "best" thing to come from the fact that people are discussing the concept of "long COVID" is that we are discussing the long term side effects of any generally considered mild illness. A small, but not insignificant, number of people have long term effects from all kinds of viral infections that are generally considered mild. Jim Henson died of pneumonia brought on by what was viewed initially as a pretty mild flu or cold that continued for weeks untreated. There is no question that any respiratory illness can exhibit these long term effects - I don't think COVID can be viewed as special here.
May 5, 2022, 2:50 am
#50
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The currently known percentage (from a couple of studies) of “long covid” prevalence seems much larger and more spread across multiple organs including odd side effects such as sudden onset of diabetes, etc., compared to typical respiratory illnesses for it to be so glibly and naively dismissed. As I said before, it is premature at the moment to base a policy assuming that it is a nothing-burger.
It's not exactly surprising to me that men have been complaining more about this testing requirement since January 2021, but a lot of people do things that aren't necessarily good for their own health. For example, even some of those who didn't think Covid-19 was a big deal for their own health and claimed to be asymptomatic when positive for Covid-19 abroad have later found out to their chagrin that they got hit with "long Covid". Some urologists have said that some "Covid is no big deal" dudes who came in as patients -- for reasons the patients didn't think was related to Covid-19 -- have turned out to be surprised that Covid-19 was a big deal that keeps them down when they want to fly with blood flow to the erectile tissue.
May 5, 2022, 10:47 am
#51
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 6,752
I was talking to some people who fielded constituent complaints on behalf of parts of the USG when it came to the US testing requirement to fly to the US, and it seems to have been males who have been disproportionately more likely to make contact complaining about the testing requirement since January 2021. Does the CDC pre-departure lawsuit case have its plaintiffs as being mostly male travelers?
May 6, 2022, 2:01 pm
#52
Join Date: May 2006
Location: MYF/CMA/SAN/YYZ/YKF
Programs: COdbaUA 1K MM, AA EXP, Bonbon Gold, GHA Titanium, Hertz PC, NEXUS and GE
Posts: 5,839
The currently known percentage (from a couple of studies) of “long covid” prevalence seems much larger and more spread across multiple organs including odd side effects such as sudden onset of diabetes, etc., compared to typical respiratory illnesses for it to be so glibly and naively dismissed. As I said before, it is premature at the moment to base a policy assuming that it is a nothing-burger.
May 6, 2022, 9:42 pm
#53
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,748
We don’t know exact answers yet but there is some evidence of Covid residuals normalized to previous years so far.
The point however is that as a policy not taking precautions to willingly expose others (including those you consider obese and more likely to suffer severe complications or less obnoxiously immuno-compressed, etc) just because of some inconvenience to others is wise until we get more data or see the variant mutations reducing.
Clearly, there is a balance to be made between function and caution. This is about taking a test before using enclosed public transport, not some lockdown. Everyone seems to agree that if they were infected, they would not voluntarily fly (assuming they are all being honest). If that is something that people are willing to do, then they must think it is something more than just a cold. The test is just a practical way of ensuring that since they can be contagiois before symptoms and the virus is still around.
Would YOU voluntarily fly if you were infected with Covid (with no more than cold symptoms) as opposed to a common cold? A honest answer would indicate the answers to many of your questions and where you are coming from?
May 7, 2022, 6:49 am
#54
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Bham, AL
Programs: Marriott Gold, AmEx Plat, Agnostic on Airline Programs
Posts: 394
Do you know they WERE NOT caused by Covid? Rhetorical question.
We don’t know exact answers yet but there is some evidence of Covid residuals normalized to previous years so far.
The point however is that as a policy not taking precautions to willingly expose others (including those you consider obese and more likely to suffer severe complications or less obnoxiously immuno-compressed, etc) just because of some inconvenience to others is wise until we get more data or see the variant mutations reducing.
Clearly, there is a balance to be made between function and caution. This is about taking a test before using enclosed public transport, not some lockdown. Everyone seems to agree that if they were infected, they would not voluntarily fly (assuming they are all being honest). If that is something that people are willing to do, then they must think it is something more than just a cold. The test is just a practical way of ensuring that since they can be contagiois before symptoms and the virus is still around.
Would YOU voluntarily fly if you were infected with Covid (with no more than cold symptoms) as opposed to a common cold? A honest answer would indicate the answers to many of your questions and where you are coming from?
We don’t know exact answers yet but there is some evidence of Covid residuals normalized to previous years so far.
The point however is that as a policy not taking precautions to willingly expose others (including those you consider obese and more likely to suffer severe complications or less obnoxiously immuno-compressed, etc) just because of some inconvenience to others is wise until we get more data or see the variant mutations reducing.
Clearly, there is a balance to be made between function and caution. This is about taking a test before using enclosed public transport, not some lockdown. Everyone seems to agree that if they were infected, they would not voluntarily fly (assuming they are all being honest). If that is something that people are willing to do, then they must think it is something more than just a cold. The test is just a practical way of ensuring that since they can be contagiois before symptoms and the virus is still around.
Would YOU voluntarily fly if you were infected with Covid (with no more than cold symptoms) as opposed to a common cold? A honest answer would indicate the answers to many of your questions and where you are coming from?
OTOH, the US is on a shrinking list of nations still requiring testing to arrive home, and so make of that what you will.
Last edited by northinsouth; May 7, 2022 at 6:56 am Reason: Forgot end of sentence.
May 7, 2022, 6:53 am
#55
Suspended
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 116
Do you know they WERE NOT caused by Covid? Rhetorical question.
We don’t know exact answers yet but there is some evidence of Covid residuals normalized to previous years so far.
The point however is that as a policy not taking precautions to willingly expose others (including those you consider obese and more likely to suffer severe complications or less obnoxiously immuno-compressed, etc) just because of some inconvenience to others is wise until we get more data or see the variant mutations reducing.
Clearly, there is a balance to be made between function and caution. This is about taking a test before using enclosed public transport, not some lockdown. Everyone seems to agree that if they were infected, they would not voluntarily fly (assuming they are all being honest). If that is something that people are willing to do, then they must think it is something more than just a cold. The test is just a practical way of ensuring that since they can be contagiois before symptoms and the virus is still around.
Would YOU voluntarily fly if you were infected with Covid (with no more than cold symptoms) as opposed to a common cold? A honest answer would indicate the answers to many of your questions and where you are coming from?
We don’t know exact answers yet but there is some evidence of Covid residuals normalized to previous years so far.
The point however is that as a policy not taking precautions to willingly expose others (including those you consider obese and more likely to suffer severe complications or less obnoxiously immuno-compressed, etc) just because of some inconvenience to others is wise until we get more data or see the variant mutations reducing.
Clearly, there is a balance to be made between function and caution. This is about taking a test before using enclosed public transport, not some lockdown. Everyone seems to agree that if they were infected, they would not voluntarily fly (assuming they are all being honest). If that is something that people are willing to do, then they must think it is something more than just a cold. The test is just a practical way of ensuring that since they can be contagiois before symptoms and the virus is still around.
Would YOU voluntarily fly if you were infected with Covid (with no more than cold symptoms) as opposed to a common cold? A honest answer would indicate the answers to many of your questions and where you are coming from?
By this point, people have to assess their own appetite for risk. Everyone could have gotton 15 jabs by now if they want, plus choose to continue wearing a mask if they think it works.
May 7, 2022, 6:58 am
#56
Suspended
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 116
Just to show how bogus the whole thing is, look at the White House Correspondence Supper last week.
Everyone was jabbed and probably had ‘umpteen’ boosters, plus they ALL tested before entering.
Obviously, they all tested negative at arrival and look how many still had the cold this week. A lot of them.
The testing thing should just be eliminated entirely, practically everywhere.
When you’re sick, treat the cold symptoms and move on.
Everyone was jabbed and probably had ‘umpteen’ boosters, plus they ALL tested before entering.
Obviously, they all tested negative at arrival and look how many still had the cold this week. A lot of them.
The testing thing should just be eliminated entirely, practically everywhere.
When you’re sick, treat the cold symptoms and move on.
May 7, 2022, 7:19 am
#57
Suspended
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Isn’t doing so still grounds for criminal prosecution by US federal prosecutors?
I don’t know about you, but from my perspective I’m sure that scamming the US federal government is not my idea of something to be done by me.
I don’t know about you, but from my perspective I’m sure that scamming the US federal government is not my idea of something to be done by me.
May 7, 2022, 7:49 am
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: jfk area
Programs: AA platinum; 2MM AA, Delta Diamond, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 10,291
I have two sets (from different manufacturers) of the FREE covid test kits mailed to me by the US GOV.
Before my next trip back to the USA from Europe I plan on using two covid test kits (one from each supplier) as a “dry run” before doing the real test. If I test negative on each unofficial test, but, positive on the official test would i be safe to conclude that it was a false positive?
Some airlines are more concerned with one’s submission of the “CDC attestation form” than seeing that one actually tested negative.
So, if I “attest” that I tested negative would I be making a false statement.
—I was negative 2/3 on tests taken in close proximity of each other.
A general question re GOVID testing, for the supervised (via ZOOM) testing would false positives be less likely using a “cursory” swab vs deep swabbing?
Before my next trip back to the USA from Europe I plan on using two covid test kits (one from each supplier) as a “dry run” before doing the real test. If I test negative on each unofficial test, but, positive on the official test would i be safe to conclude that it was a false positive?
Some airlines are more concerned with one’s submission of the “CDC attestation form” than seeing that one actually tested negative.
So, if I “attest” that I tested negative would I be making a false statement.
—I was negative 2/3 on tests taken in close proximity of each other.A general question re GOVID testing, for the supervised (via ZOOM) testing would false positives be less likely using a “cursory” swab vs deep swabbing?
May 7, 2022, 5:52 pm
#59
Join Date: May 2009
Location: South Park, CO
Programs: Tegridy Elite
Posts: 5,678
Make of this what you will, in terms of the Administration's willingness to drop or relax the testing requirement...
https://www.wlwt.com/article/coronav...llion/39934234
https://www.wlwt.com/article/coronav...llion/39934234
The Biden administration is issuing a new warning that the U.S. could potentially see 100 million COVID-19 infections this fall and winter, as officials publicly stress the need for more funding from Congress to prepare the nation.
May 7, 2022, 11:12 pm
#60
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DCA/IAD
Programs: AS, US, Hilton, BA, DL, SPG, AA, VS
Posts: 1,628
Make of this what you will, in terms of the Administration's willingness to drop or relax the testing requirement...
https://www.wlwt.com/article/coronav...llion/39934234
https://www.wlwt.com/article/coronav...llion/39934234
What I'd love to see is for someone in Congress (probably the Senate, given how easy it is for one Senator to muck things up) to say, "You want the money, then drop this stupid testing rule." Probably won't happen, but I can dream, right?