Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNBC)   Nearly 10,000 passengers tested negative before flying - the post-flight Delta here is interesting   (cnbc.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Polymerase chain reaction, Infectious disease, Delta's preflight testing program, Infection, Delta Air Lines, PCR test, Results of the study, number of Covid infections  
•       •       •

1638 clicks; posted to Business » on 17 Sep 2021 at 1:25 PM (4 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



14 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2021-09-17 1:29:50 PM  
I can't say this is very reassuring. So great, only 4 tested positive upon arrival, which probably means they got it between the pre-departure test and landing. But they could have spread it to hundreds of others on travel day who wouldn't necessarily test positive when they arrived.
 
2021-09-17 1:50:56 PM  
Delta3
 
2021-09-17 2:01:32 PM  
Tri Delta Sorority

3 times worse
 
2021-09-17 2:56:07 PM  

ImpendingCynic: I can't say this is very reassuring. So great, only 4 tested positive upon arrival, which probably means they got it between the pre-departure test and landing. But they could have spread it to hundreds of others on travel day who wouldn't necessarily test positive when they arrived.


Assuming the tests were 100% accurate.
 
2021-09-17 3:00:17 PM  

ImpendingCynic: I can't say this is very reassuring. So great, only 4 tested positive upon arrival, which probably means they got it between the pre-departure test and landing. But they could have spread it to hundreds of others on travel day who wouldn't necessarily test positive when they arrived.


The 4 were screened out at the departure airport, before boarding the plane. Only 1 case was detected upon arrival.
 
2021-09-17 3:18:48 PM  
The delta of the delta on Delta needs to be a comical song in a Broadway musical from 1958.
 
2021-09-17 5:13:32 PM  

radbaron: ImpendingCynic: I can't say this is very reassuring. So great, only 4 tested positive upon arrival, which probably means they got it between the pre-departure test and landing. But they could have spread it to hundreds of others on travel day who wouldn't necessarily test positive when they arrived.

Assuming the tests were 100% accurate.


And that they were performed at all. I don't believe anyone who claims a negative test unless I see the evidence or I already trust them. DNRTFA.

I took amtrak twice in the last couple of months. They require no more than a simple attestation of negative results or lack of symptoms and exposure.

No one would lie about that would they?
 
2021-09-17 9:22:07 PM  
Shouldn't they be testing that day? A test three days before departing seems ... less than useful. If I tell someone "It's fine, I tested negative for HIV 3 days ago," it's not very reassuring if I've had bareback sex with 3 dozen people whose statuses I don't know in the span of those three days.
 
2021-09-17 9:50:10 PM  

ImpendingCynic: I can't say this is very reassuring. So great, only 4 tested positive upon arrival, which probably means they got it between the pre-departure test and landing. But they could have spread it to hundreds of others on travel day who wouldn't necessarily test positive when they arrived.


Far more likely, they were infected very shortly before or shortly after the PCR test, and their viral load rose to the point of detectable shedding during the flight.

The delta monstrosity is far more worrying in this regard, because there is no slow rise in viral load. People basically go from zero to full on flaming infectious within hours.

This is the origin of that "1000x more infectious" nonsense we heard about a while ago. Suspected exposures were PCR tested daily in China. But with delta, instead of first testing weakly positive (Ct > 30, corresponding to amplification of > 1 billion) before testing positive and infectious, they would go from zero detectable virus (Ct > 35, gain of 30 billion) to horrifyingly infectious (Ct averaging 24, amplification of only 16 million) in a single 24 hour interval.
 
2021-09-17 10:19:15 PM  

austerity101: Shouldn't they be testing that day? A test three days before departing seems ... less than useful. If I tell someone "It's fine, I tested negative for HIV 3 days ago," it's not very reassuring if I've had bareback sex with 3 dozen people whose statuses I don't know in the span of those three days.


I had to get tested before going to USVI. It was a REALLY tight window because of the turnaround time on results (and the fact they didn't guarantee result timing in anything but business days)

In short - you'd be hard-pressed to compress that too much further
 
2021-09-17 10:20:06 PM  

austerity101: Shouldn't they be testing that day? A test three days before departing seems ... less than useful. If I tell someone "It's fine, I tested negative for HIV 3 days ago," it's not very reassuring if I've had bareback sex with 3 dozen people whose statuses I don't know in the span of those three days.


I didn't know craigslist was back.  Doublelist has just been dragging its feet as the alternative.

/would like to subscribe to your news letter
 
2021-09-18 2:55:55 AM  

austerity101: Shouldn't they be testing that day? A test three days before departing seems ... less than useful. If I tell someone "It's fine, I tested negative for HIV 3 days ago," it's not very reassuring if I've had bareback sex with 3 dozen people whose statuses I don't know in the span of those three days.


The study used a PCR test 72 hours before and then rapid antigen tests before and after the flight, with positive results confirmed by another molecular test. It's not practical to do the PCR test later due to the turnaround time. This looks good for the sufficiency of only doing PCR three days before, though they didn't confirm negative tests after the flight (which the rapid antigen tests are more susceptible to).
 
2021-09-18 6:09:05 AM  
It was strange to require a test before arriving in the US this summer, but the domestic flights later in the trip had no testing requirement.
 
2021-09-18 12:21:11 PM  
This translates to one case detection per 1,970 travelers "during a time of high prevalence of active infection in the United States," according to the article.


that's not good, that's one person on every 20 planes or fewer, or 5% chance per flight.
 
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.