Regrettably, there are individuals who exhibit evident symptoms yet would gladly travel and deceive on a simple questionnaire.
That might explain why governments adopt a blanket rapid test approach irrespective of the potential for false positives (even given the potential, as the article alludes to, for false negatives).
You’re now expected just to mask up and travel. Recently just had this experience with a family member.
Airline would not do anything at all. Travel agent (website) would only book a new flight, but not refund the old one - they said (probably truthfully) that the airline ties their hands. Travel insurance would only pay out if the trip was _cut short_ because of a COVID diagnosis (how does that even work?), or if they were placed under mandatory quarantine by a government authority.
Seems unethical to me on all fronts but that’s how things are.
I suppose it’s not much different to how people are now, in most countries, just expected to go to work unless they’re heavily symptomatic (and even the “unless they’re heavily symptomatic” seems like lip-service that is not universally observed).
Actually, maybe I should amend that. “You’re now expected just to mask up and travel” is really “You’re now expected just to travel”. The considerate may mask up of their own volition - no one is enforcing it, and there are barely any recommendations.
In the same manner that humans have been domesticated by wheat, with all the best land, food, water, and cushiest existence on the planet. (I believe that this was a comment by Niven or Heinlein.)
That might explain why governments adopt a blanket rapid test approach irrespective of the potential for false positives (even given the potential, as the article alludes to, for false negatives).