PCR test requirements at the border being re-examined

[damo]

Dr. Tam discussing how testing at border needs to be re-examined.


https://www.cp24.com/news/pcr-test-requirements-at-the-border-need-to-be-re-examined-tam-1.5654087

 

[KathyM2]

I heard this!!! I hope they do re-examine...although it also looks like cases are going up in Canada so not sure this is the time...but I do think Antigen tests maybe could be enough..they are cheaper and easier to get...and especially since we have to be vaccinated to travel anyway...makes sense...

 

[cdunn03]

I hope we hear something soon!

 

[2Lunds]

I'm worried she means that they're too lenient and that's what needs to be re-examined. Ie: closing the "loophole" of testing in Canada before a day trip then using that same test for re-entry.

 

[quandrea]

I'm worried she means that they're too lenient and that's what needs to be re-examined. Ie: closing the "loophole" of testing in Canada before a day trip then using that same test for re-entry.

I hadn’t thought of this, but just our luck, you might be right!

 

[wdwmom3]

I’m hoping they start allowing the rapid tests or just drop it all together.

 

[igrsod]

I just booked our beepermd appointments for our dec trip. It would be great if we didn't need to jump through these hoops as we are vaccinated, but I don't think they will do away with the testing requirement for a while.

 

[nuttynatty]

I just booked our beepermd appointments for our dec trip. It would be great if we didn't need to jump through these hoops as we are vaccinated, but I don't think they will do away with the testing requirement for a while.

I imagine this is for driving through the border only, or, as others pointed out taking other types of tests. I doubt they would drop testing requirements for airplanes where you are locked in a tiny indoor space for hours.

 

[von Monster]

I imagine this is for driving through the border only, or, as others pointed out taking other types of tests. I doubt they would drop testing requirements for airplanes where you are locked in a tiny indoor space for hours.

Why? I don't see a difference.

You're either positive 72 hours before you enter the country or your not; being on a plane changes nothing really. You could have hung out in a tiny indoor space for a few hours before showing up at the land border too.

 

[nuttynatty]

Why? I don't see a difference.

You're either positive 72 hours before you enter the country or your not; being on a plane changes nothing really. You could have hung out in a tiny indoor space for a few hours before showing up at the land border too.

Well there are always what ifs.... I mean I am not saying this is my opinion and what *I* think needs to be done. It's how the US decided to do it and I wouldn't be surprised if we followed suit. Many people who drive across the border do it for a few hours or a day for business or for shopping and aren't exposed to many people in a closed off space. I would assume this is why the US made the rule.

 

[igrsod]

I think both countries are trying to balance public health with the economics of cross border tourism. There are many businesses that rely on this and the testing requirement makes it so that we don't go across to Watertown NY for a little shopping trip like we used to. Without the testing, I know many people in our area that would be pouring money into the US economy for some day trips, and I'm sure that would happen vice versa as well.

 

[hdrolfe]

Once the 5 - 11 year olds are vaccinated I hope it will be that testing is dropped if you are vaccinated, driving or flying. But time will tell. It certainly adds extra planning to a trip having to find the time to do it, and costs for some of the tests. Given the highest number of covid positive cases right now (at least in Ontario from what I understand on CBC) are in those under 12, lets hope we get to move on with our lives sooner than later.

I can't see them "examining" things only to make things more restricted, the only thing they can do is drop it or reduce the test type. Go with antigen instead of the PCR type, drop it for driving across or perhaps short trips (thinking day trips). They want to boost the economy and that goes both ways, yes we Canadians love going down to shop or pick up parcels but I think there are some Americans who love to shop here too, and the testing is a burden on them coming here for a day trip.

All speculation until they announce something any way. My next trip is in March and I hope it's less testing required.

 

[von Monster]

Well there are always what ifs.... I mean I am not saying this is my opinion and what *I* think needs to be done. It's how the US decided to do it and I wouldn't be surprised if we followed suit. Many people who drive across the border do it for a few hours or a day for business or for shopping and aren't exposed to many people in a closed off space. I would assume this is why the US made the rule.

Yes, but that's a rule that also makes zero sense - why would someone being jammed into a shopping centre with zero real ventilation be more safe than someone on a plane with full ventilation and HEPA filters?

So to expect the Canadian government to follow suit for the primary advantage of cross-border shoppers is just odd. The only effect that would have is to drive more people to flying from the US as it gives American airlines and even larger price advantage in skipping the tests.

 

[ellbell]

Why? I don't see a difference.

You're either positive 72 hours before you enter the country or your not; being on a plane changes nothing really. You could have hung out in a tiny indoor space for a few hours before showing up at the land border too.

I think it's because you have the potential to infect multiple other people while sitting on a plane for hours with strangers if you are positive and don't know. You are less likely to infect others while driving across in your own vehicle.

 

[Juventus]

Just to point out, you don't need a pcr test...there are many others that are acceptable including a NAAT test available at many Walgreens for FREE.


https://travel.gc.ca/travel-covid/t...ovid-19-testing-travellers-coming-into-canada
I feel like I explain this to people everyday...and most still don't believe me.

But, of course, a change to only a rapid test would be great.

 

[von Monster]

I think it's because you have the potential to infect multiple other people while sitting on a plane for hours with strangers if you are positive and don't know. You are less likely to infect others while driving across in your own vehicle.

But isn't the point of the test to prevent spreading COVID into Canada vs. preventing spread on a plane? The probability of you boarding a plane with COVID and spreading it as opposed to driving across the border with it and spreading it that way are about within the margin or error are they not?

Either the test has value and should be kept or it doesn't and should be scrapped. Being as we're not testing essential workers crossing the border daily I'm guessing it should be scrapped but that's just my opinion.

 

[ellbell]

But isn't the point of the test to prevent spreading COVID into Canada vs. preventing spread on a plane? The probability of you boarding a plane with COVID and spreading it as opposed to driving across the border with it and spreading it that way are about within the margin or error are they not?

Either the test has value and should be kept or it doesn't and should be scrapped. Being as we're not testing essential workers crossing the border daily I'm guessing it should be scrapped but that's just my opinion.

If you are on a plane and have covid and spread it then those people go into Canadian communities and spread it further. Testing before boarding a plane reduces this. I'm not saying it is very beneficial I'm just explaining the difference because it was asked.

 

[damo]

I'm sitting here watching the tens of thousands of people crammed into the Leafs game, most maskless, and it makes me wonder.

 

[von Monster]

If you are on a plane and have covid and spread it then those people go into Canadian communities and spread it further. Testing before boarding a plane reduces this. I'm not saying it is very beneficial I'm just explaining the difference because it was asked.

If you have COVID and get in a car and drive across you will still spread COVID "into Canadian communities". The plane is ancillary to the argument of either the test has value or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it should be gotten rid of.

Greyhound will be bringing busses across - should they have to bring a test as it would be very similar conditions (actually likely far worse if you've ever ridden one...) to a plane?

Not trying to be difficult, I'm just pointing out that being in a wheeled vehicle vs. an aeroplane is just semantics and has been brought up mostly by people wanting to drive across to shop.

I'm sitting here watching the tens of thousands of people crammed into the Leafs game, most maskless, and it makes me wonder.

Leaf's game with fully vaccinated people = safe. Plane with fully vaccinated people = unsafe.

 

[damo]

If you have COVID and get in a car and drive across you will still spread COVID "into Canadian communities". The plane is ancillary to the argument of either the test has value or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it should be gotten rid of.

Greyhound will be bringing busses across - should they have to bring a test as it would be very similar conditions (actually likely far worse if you've ever ridden one...) to a plane?

Not trying to be difficult, I'm just pointing out that being in a wheeled vehicle vs. an aeroplane is just semantics and has been brought up mostly by people wanting to drive across to shop.



Leaf's game with fully vaccinated people = safe. Plane with fully vaccinated people = unsafe.

Leaf's game with fully vaccinated, unmasked people=safe

Plane with fully vaccinated, masked people = unsafe