Airlines say mandatory pre-flight COVID tests would kick-start travel

We appreciate that COVID and related Government policies are proving contentious topics with Executive Traveller readers, but we once again remind readers to keep their comments civil and on-topic, and to add value to the conversation. If you just want to have a rant, take it elsewhere.

IATA obviously trying to protect their interest, which I understand. However, if someone catches it in the Uber to the airport, I highly down the test will pick it up so soon after infection. On arrivals test I doubt wouldn be able to as well.

The other point is with 97% accuracy, on a flight of 300, you could potentially have 9 infected people board. If each person infects two others, you have then just released 27 infected people at your destination. For places like Europe and the US that are trying to suppress, this may be ok. However for places like Aus and NZ, which are trying to eliminate, I don't see how that is workable without some form of quarantine.

An antigen test is exactly that. It doesn’t test for the virus which maybe around and infectious before antibodies are developed. People still show up with the disease after 10 days of isolation and multiple tests. So IATA wants to become a super spreader.

The antigen false negatives is as high as 20%, read here.

Good to see IATA and a lot of airlines working with medical authorities to restart and grow travel safely. And credit is due to airlines that have kept flying not separating families and business.

A much better and long-term approach than the Australian "national carrier" that just threw its hands in the air and sent its planes into storage instead of having a go.

Yes!! Finally someone advocating for a practical,  common sense solution. Given existing screening (temp check, health declarations) and increased cleaning and safety measures already in place, a test with 97% accuracy is more than sufficient 

Baron most suggest it is closer to 80% accuracy.

It is an interesting move by IATA to shift the onus of providing a safe environment for transport solely on airlines to government and airports.

Not withstanding the much poorer accuracy of these rapid tests considering airlines are herding 200-300 pax into a confined space so a 20% false negative result (and potentially higher in a poorly performed sample taking done by “trained” personnel) meant in a highly prevalent country as much as 40 pax can be let into the cabin due to wrong results. Try enforcing mask wearing in pax when they choose to buy into the false sense of security by the badge of honour from the rapid tests. Then try controlling movement restrictions if IATA convince the governments to adopt these tests as COVID-19 passport instead of the standard but more accurate PCR test in the hand of healthcare professional. 

And how would the airports comply with this? Conventional wisdom would suggest COVID-19 screening should happen before checking in and security screening (otherwise there will be plenty of delays looking for bags of rejected pax who failed testing, just like the IRA bombing years in the 80s) but where would the airport find enough additional space for queuing, testing and waiting for results (minimum 15 mins) while maintaining safe distancing?

That of course wouldn’t be IATA’s problem once the governments adopt their Trojan horse as a standard...

Hi David

great news......did you ever receive my email to you several weeks back where I suggested this approach? 

Testing is the only path and rapid testing will be no different than checking luggage for explosives.  Logic should mean that also staff will need to get tested and that both passengers and staff can't even get into the departure terminals unless all clear.

Passengers have been arriving to airports, getting on board aircraft and disembarking with illness (unknowing or in most cases knowingly) for decades, and no IATA resolution to enforce any kind of medical testing prior to travel until now. Instead of basic hygiene and compulsory mask wearing which has proved to be effective, IATA are proposing a test that's not reliable to be administered by untrained airport staff. Holly Molly typical IATA, all they know how to do is spend members money on implementing bureaucratic and convaluted concepts and then duck and weave all responsibility until there is another Geneva conference that they absolutely have to attend.

Hi AT

IATA could also just do nothing and let more airlines go bust.  Your common flu or cold surely shouldn't be compared to Covid-19......if so why is the entire globe in meltdown!  Isn't Covid-19 far more infectious and has also the potential to attack organs including the brain (Parkinson)?  Surely a $10 test is a much better option than contracting Covid-19.  Maybe we can possibly free us from the common flu and colds as a result of advances made specifically to combat Covid-19.

Another genuine side benefit is that airlines are retiring old aircrafts and invest in planes reducing the environmental load by 30%, a real bonus for our world.