The CDC order from December 2, 2021, requiring persons aged two and above to show a negative COVID-19 test result or documentation of recovery from COVID-19 before boarding a flight to the United States, is rescinded, effective June 12, 2022, at 12:01AM ET. This means that starting at 12:01AM ET on June 12, 2022, air passengers will not need to get tested and show a negative COVID-19 test result or show documentation of recovery from COVID-19 prior to boarding a flight to the United States regardless of vaccination status or citizenship. Of note, CDC’s Order requiring proof of vaccination for non-citizen nonimmigrants to travel to the United States is still in effect.
One of the last big Covid-19 travel restrictions in the United States disappeared today. Proof of vaccination for some is still required.
An interesting addition by spokespeople for the Whitehouse is that this order could be reinstated if necessary due to new variants. I would love to know the criteria for doing so and how that would actually work. Would the administration just stop inbound arrivals until airlines could get their systems for checking tests back into place?
I am not arguing for passivity in the face of danger. It is distressing that US policymakers do not seem interested in spending big for pandemic preparedness. America needs a new Operation Warp Speed for pan-coronavirus vaccines and nasal spray vaccines. It should be gathering more data on Covid and improving its system of clinical trials for anti-Covid remedies, among other measures.
I am simply saying that removing the Covid test for entry to the US would bring an end to one of the more egregious instances of “hygiene theater.” And it would send a signal that America is welcoming the world once again.
The above summarizes a lot of my thoughts on the inbound testing requirement for the United States. I think it leaves out the fact that there are already hundreds of thousands of cases already present in the US and keeping out a few cases here and there is not a net win. Also, the number of cases not caught by inbound testing due to the disease not being present in large enough numbers in the host or the host not yet having symptoms is also a huge gap. Increasing the amount of research we are doing on long Covid, on future vaccines, and treatments would be time better spent.
I’ve heard from a number of people that the test they received was either a “joke” where they swab barely touched their nose or the test was completely ignored by the airline at the departure airport. From those who do test positive, even with no symptoms, they’re stuck with a costly longer stay in the country they are coming from and while some might be willing to put up with that, a lot of travelers aren’t.
All this to say, Covid is again spiking in the US though I get the impression most Americans aren’t paying attention or don’t care.
In the years to come, we will only begin to understand the devastation our overreaction to the pandemic inflicted upon the most vulnerable among us: the children who were kept out of school, the elderly and hospital patients who were separated from loved ones and made to endure pain alone, and those who were forced to live in isolation for a “public emergency” that still has not ended.
We will return to “normal” because we want to return to normal. That should actually unite us, even if we disagree on how fast it should be. The last two years taught us the amazing spirit of human ingenuity that so quickly developed a vaccine. It also taught us that we need one another and those who have been at the forefront of rolling back restrictions cannot simply be dismissed as selfish miscreants, but humans who recognize our need for one another in every area of life.
I don’t disagree that we need to start making moves to return to normal, but I don’t think the new normal will be anything like it was 3 years ago. At the same time it’s a bit of a cop-out to state that “we should want to return to normal” but that it can be over a timeline that we can disagree on. I don’t know of anyone in the United States who really wants to keep things as they are. Even in the article quoted it seems like the author is more concerned about the speed of the return to normal rather than what normal means.
As someone who has lost a family member to COVID-19 (who caught it at another family event) the cost of normal seems too high. Would I love to go out and eat at restaurants or travel freely around the world again? Sure. Is it worth the loss of another family member? Absolutely not. People are tired of being cooped up or limiting their interactions due to COVID but a lot of that is because there is a real risk. We don’t fully understand the impact that the disease has on young children or even healthy adults. We don’t know what long COVID will mean for people who are still struggling from a disease they caught months ago. But sure, let’s just act like none of that is happening and get back to normal.
Also, the use of quotes in the above post carry a tinge of sarcasm. Is 900k+ dead in the United States not a public emergency? Is it only a real problem if we see death in the streets?
Honestly, I think the return to normal is a choice that each person is going to have to make for themselves. I know people who are traveling now and following all of the country protocols of the places they visit. I also know people who are immunocompromised and are staying home for their own safety. I don’t think there is some simple formula we can apply as a society and say “we’re back to what we were” overnight. There is a calculus that people are having to work out for themselves on what they are comfortable with and when.
As far as masks on airplanes and in airports, I’m fine with it; Every airport I’ve visited in the last year or so have been jam packed with people. I would rather the United States end the mandatory testing to enter the country or at least remove it for vaccinated people. I am not sure the policy is actually helping us keep COVID at bay but it is certainly putting a financial burden on people who do test positive after being overseas. For me, I am looking for international travel later in 2022. I hope by then we’ll be at a place where COVID is less prevalent and more people have had the opportunity for vaccination.
Just a quick reminder that starting April 1, 2021, Alaska MileagePlan members will no longer be able to redeem their miles for Emirates First Class. This comes after a late 2020 announcement by Alaska that Emirates was removing the ability for their partners to redeem for the coveted front cabin.
So, if you have some extra Alaska miles gathering dust, it’s a good time to do some searching for that award, you only have two days left. I booked a reward from the US to Malaysia in early 2022 to at least lock in an A380 with the onboard shower. With the uncertainty of Covid restrictions I went as far into the future as I could. I am hopeful that the world will be on its way to a full recovery and reopening by then.
Between January and March of this year I flew United quite a bit. When Covid travel restrictions hit in mid-March the airlines started changing their requirements to qualify for their statuses for 2021. In most cases the airlines actually extended a frequent flyer’s status into 2021 carte blanche but with some caveats. In United’s case, to earn their upgrade certificates a flyer still needs to spend a certain amount and fly a specific number of flights in 2020. Due to all of my work travel I had no issues meeting the spend amount (Premier Qualifying Points) but I am one flight short of the needed number to earn the upgrade certificates.
With Covid still ravaging the United States I reached out to United Airlines’ frequent flyer support team to inquire about whether there would be exceptions made for people like myself who came very close but didn’t cross the line for next year’s upgrades. The quick response verbatim was:
You must meet the published criteria for awarding of the PlusPoints.
Besides it being a rather terse, somewhat unfriendly e-mail, United is saying all flights must be flown and no exceptions will be made. For me, this means I need to fly that one flight to earn the upgrade certificates for 2021. But is flying that one flight worth it from a safety perspective?
We’ve been pretty good about social distancing and isolation during Covid so it seems irrational to go fly just to earn the upgrades but at the same time, it’s like throwing the upgrades away. The way I would do this would likely be to fly United to San Francisco or Los Angeles (Los Angeles would require a connection) mid-week as the flights are super cheap and then I’d take Alaska Airlines back home since they are still blocking middle seats when possible. I’d wear an N95 mask the entire time and wouldn’t plan on eating or drinking on the flights.
Now I just have to decide if this is too much of a risk or if I am being paranoid. What would you do?
One of my absolute favorite places to eat in New York City is Xi’an Famous Foods. The flavors of the western Chinese restaurant make it a “don’t miss” option when visiting the city. You have a mix of Muslim influence and Chinese noodles that blend together to make a meal that is amazing. My favorite dish is the spicy cumin lamb hand ripped noodles in broth. It’s delicious, spicy, and slightly mouth-numbing.
CEO Jason Wang divulges the untold story of how this empire came to be, alongside the never-before-published recipes that helped create this New York City icon. From heavenly ribbons of liang pi doused in a bright vinegar sauce to flatbread filled with caramelized pork to cumin lamb over hand-pulled Biang Biang noodles, this cookbook helps home cooks make the dishes that fans of Xi’an Famous Foods line up for while also exploring the vibrant cuisine and culture of Xi’an.
Needless to say, I’m stoked.
* This is an affiliate link and I will earn a small commission if you buy the book using my link.
European Union countries rushing to revive their economies and reopen their borders after months of coronavirus restrictions are prepared to block Americans from entering because the United States has failed to control the scourge, according to draft lists of acceptable travelers seen by The New York Times.
and
A prohibition of Americans by Brussels partly reflects the shifting pattern of the pandemic. In March, when Europe was the epicenter, Mr. Trump infuriated European leaders when he banned citizens from most European Union countries from traveling to America. Mr. Trump justified the move as necessary to protect the United States, which at the time had roughly 1,100 coronavirus cases and 38 deaths.
The Times is making a bit of a reach on implying that this is due to Trump banning European citizens from the United States at the beginning of the European surge. I am sure there is a tiny bit of truth to it but I doubt anyone in the EU delegation will say it. To me the move seems more of a pragmatic decision based on where the U.S. and other countries are when it comes to containing Covid-19. I’ve seen posts on Facebook and Twitter of U.S. citizens hopping around European countries because the entry procedures are not uniform, so locking down access at the entry points makes a lot of sense.
Of course this stinks if you are an American wanting or needing to travel to the European Union over the next few months but since we can’t seem to wear masks or socially distance, we reap what we sow.
I recently posted a quick poll on Twitter asking how many people are planning leisure travel via airplane and was surprised by the response. So far out of 334 responses, nearly 40% plan to travel in the next 1-3 months. Only 22% have no plans to travel. With this EU news and the fact that we still can’t seem to get the disease under control here in the States, I am not convinced it is time to travel again. It honestly seems like it is more of a pain than it’s worth and the risks are still far too high.
One of the more troubling trends during the Covid-19 pandemic is the refusal to wear a mask by segments of the U.S. population. The reason to wear a mask while in a building or in large groups is simple; When everyone (or a majority) of people are masked, the spread of the disease will be minimized by limiting how much of the disease makes it into the air. And researchers are investigating the possibility that exposure to less of the virus means either not catching Covid-19 or only having very minor symptoms.
by Stefano Annovazzi Lodi
The reasons people don’t want to wear masks are varied and in some cases ridiculous. One of the crazier claims is that wearing a mask will make the wearer inhale too much CO2. Unless you have an underlying medical condition or difficulty breathing to begin with, this claim is simply false. From Dr. Bill Carroll PhD at the University of Indiana:
“It has to be a pretty high concentration to be capable of causing harm. CO2 is present in the atmosphere at a level of about 0.04%. It is dangerous in an atmosphere when it is greater than about 10%.”
Funnily enough, you can also be harmed by a lack of CO2 as well. From the same article, if you held your breath too much:
“If you hold your breath, you wind up with too much CO2. The core issue is that CO2 regulates the pH of the blood—too much CO2 and the blood becomes too acidic; too little and it becomes too basic (alkaline). In either case, your body detects the change in acidity and you pass out, which is the body’s way of saying, ‘please stop fooling with me and breathe normally.’”
So, if you insist on not wearing a mask because you think you’ll breathe in too much CO2, please also don’t hold your breath either.
And most places asking (or telling) you to wear a mask are making it clear that children are not required to wear one nor are people with breathing problems. In fact, in the requirements I’ve seen, places are explicitly stating that those groups shouldn’t wear a mask.
The other strange, but less surprising, reason that people are refusing to wear a mask is the “personal freedom” argument. This is the notion that wearing a mask violates some kind of personal freedom you have. I feel that this argument holds little water simply because in this case a personal freedom puts others at risk. The wearing of a mask isn’t just to protect you the wearer, it’s to also protect the others around you and with large segments of the population wearing such a mask, the risk goes down, even for those who can’t wear one. So, by arguing that your personal freedom is being violated you are essentially saying you don’t care what happens to anyone around you (or yourself).
Is it fun wearing a mask? No, not really. But my personal, temporary discomfort is a small price to pay to help fight the fight against Covid-19 and help make the reopening process less dangerous.
I am fascinated that this is such a controversial issue in the United States. In East Asia wearing a mask is commonplace when there are public health risks and in Japan, this practice stretches back to the 1918 Flu pandemic. This Time article gives some insight into why here in the States it’s such a big deal:
The difference in perception of the mask comes down, in part, to cultural norms about covering your face, he says. “In social interactions in the West, you need to show your identity and make eye contact. Facial expression is very important.”
I say, social norms be damned. A few paragraphs later in the story, there is the sentiment in Hong Kong:
“Wearing a face mask is just common sense. It creates a barrier, so nothing can touch your nose and mouth. Why wouldn’t I wear a face mask?” Says Ho.
So, there are very few negative aspects of wearing a mask and while it’s effectiveness will likely never be completely understood, there is some evidence that it helps, so why not wear one?
Lastly, airlines are now enforcing their face mask requirements more stringently and in some cases saying that passengers could be banned from flying the carrier if they refuse to wear one. I’m nearly 100% positive someone out there will challenge this in court and such a move goes back to my above point, personal comfort should not trump public safety in the time of a pandemic. But again, I am sure someone will try to make the argument that they shouldn’t have to wear a mask.
In any case, unless you are someone who can’t wear mask due to health reasons, please, please, please, put the mask on when you go into a business or are around a lot of people. Please.
You may remember that I posted about United’s refusal to refund tickets for cancelled flights, instead offering passengers ETCs (electronic travel certificates) for future bookings. During the crazy times we are living, United is trying to preserve as much cash as possible. Their recent earnings call statedearnings call stated a first quarter net loss of $639 million or $7.1 million/day. But, United is still partaking in rather peculiar and misleading behavior. Recently, the airline has skirted Department of Transportation rules for refunds by claiming only cancellations where the customer could not be re-accommodated on another flight within 6 hours of the original were due a refund. The DOT website states the following:
In the following situations, passengers are entitled to a refund of the ticket price and/or associated fees.
Cancelled Flight – A passenger is entitled to a refund if the airline cancelled a flight, regardless of the reason, and the passenger chooses not to travel.
Schedule Change/Significant Delay – A passenger is entitled to a refund if the airline made a significant schedule change and/or significantly delays a flight and the passenger chooses not to travel.
That seems pretty straightforward. If your flight gets cancelled, you get a refund. Full stop. Back to my recent experience, United refused to give a refund for multiple flight cancellations on the same itinerary and the only alternative was to spend the night at O’Hare on my way to Montreal. As a result, I filed a DOT complaint, explaining the situation and giving screenshots of the flight cancellations. A few days later I received a reply from a United representative that my complaint was received and that a refund was being processed. Fast forward 17 business days which is the average refund time with United lately and I received the following in my inbox:
Did you catch that? Here it is as plain text (emphasis mine)
Sometimes forces beyond our control make it hard for us to give you the best experience, and your travel doesn’t go to plan. To thank you for your patience, we’ve gone ahead and refunded your ticket.
The Electronic Travel Certificate may be used for future travel on United – and United Express®-operated flights, and it must be redeemed by the expiration date using the PIN number provided.
I’ve always thought of a refund as a return of my payment back to me. If I pay with cash, the vendor gives me cash back (or a debit card that I can use anywhere). If I pay with a credit card the vendor returns the payment back to the credit card. Apparently, United thinks “refund” means “Electronic Travel Certificate”. Again, they are likely trying to preserve cash but this is not just disingenuous, it’s lying. This is not a refund, it is a credit that you have to use with United. You can’t use that money for something else, like food. All I can think of is a family planning on a taking a vacation when all of the Covid-19 shutdowns begin. Their flights cancel and they call United and are told that they’ll get a refund, then they receive an e-mail like what I got and now they believe they’re out that cash. It is not right that United is playing with words to try and keep as much cash as they can as the airline industry suffers.
All I can think of is Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride. United keeps using “refund” in their language but I do not think it means what they think it means.
My advice to you, the traveler, is to be persistent. I followed up with United after receiving this email and after a lengthy back and forth, I clearly explained that I did not cancel the flights voluntarily and that the offered alternative flights were not acceptable. I have since been told that I will receive a refund to my original form of payment in 21 business days… It seems United has a single intern processing all refunds.
I wrote a post in late November about the perfect travel earbuds that focused on my search for earbuds that would fit my needs. After that, I started seriously looking at the AirPods Pro. At first, I really balked at the idea of the AirPods; I thought the stems sticking out of the ears looked really ridiculous and that it was a frivolous purchase. However, a co-worker had recommended them and after some research, I picked up a pair. After having them for a few months, I have to say that I’m impressed. I mostly use the AirPods Pro for listening to music while commuting on the train, or to iPad video when on a plane, or occasionally for phone calls.
Audio Consumption
At the time that I bought the AirPods Pro I was traveling to New York City every week, a 5-6 hour flight, depending on winds. I spend my time on planes typically working while listening to music or with a television show on my iPad that I can kind of ignore (I like the noise). The AirPods Pro offer great noise cancellation that reduces the engine noise to a dull hum. It performs less efficiently when it comes to human noise, talking, crying, etc. when on the plane. I don’t know if this is because the headphones are working so hard to reduce the engine noise or if they just struggle with noncontinuous noise.
The audio quality for video is perfect for me, the noise cancellation makes it so I don’t have to have my iPad turned all the way up and the clarity is good enough that I didn’t notice any issues. For music, I am no audiophile but I was happy. The bass is enough for me without being so heavy I can’t enjoy a song. All in all, I am happy to listen to music on the AirPods Pro. When walking around town I typically use transparency mode just to be aware of my surroundings. In NYC this is a huge help to hear sirens or people honking when at crosswalks, etc. As soon as I would get to the subway, I turn on the full noise cancellation and don’t have to hear the screeching of a train coming into the station or other loud noises.
The two big things that I appreciate with the AirPods Pro is that they are comfortable to wear and the single charge life of the earbuds is as advertised, 4.5 hours. I could almost make it from takeoff to landing on a single charge with the AirPods Pro. I typically charged them around halfway through the flight just to make sure I could make a call if needed after landing. My skepticism on the comfort of the earbuds was very strong from the get go, but they proved me wrong. I have no issue leaving AirPods Pro in my ear for significant stretches of time. It took a little bit of trial and error to choose the correctly sized plastic ear insert but once I tested them all, I was able to pick the ones that were best for my comfort.
Calls – Observations
The AirPods Pro have been an up and down experience when it comes to phone calls. Typically I can hear calls just fine but my audio back to the call is frequently broken. I have not been able to pinpoint out why this is but it seems like the Bluetooth connection is a little more flimsy. Having the noise cancellation feature is great for calls because you can be walking down a busy street and hear a call perfectly.
Other Tidbits
I know that a lot of travelers love over the ear noise cancelling headphones but for me, they take up too much space in my bag for only being useful on the plane or in a place where I’m not moving around too much. The only upside of those over the ear headphones or even wired earbuds is being able to plug-in to inflight entertainment on the plane. With the AirPods Pro there is no way to connect to inflight entertainment. Because of this, I carry a wired pair of headphones as well which definitely not what I would like to do.
The other area where I am a little disappointed with the AirPods Pro is keeping them clean. The rubber earpieces seem to be ear wax magnets and they have a piece of mesh that makes them difficult to clean. It takes a bit of finesse to get any kind of cleaning element deep enough into the earpiece to get them clear which is annoying. There also seems to be a tendency of dirt and dust to get into the bottom of the charger which can potentially keep the AirPods Pro from charging when they are in their case. I wish it was easier to keep these elements clean but it’s a small complaint.
Summary
The AirPods Pro fit my needs of a walking around, on the plane, noise cancelling earbud perfectly. The battery life of 4.5 hours without a charge is great and the comfort level of the earbuds themselves allows me to leave them in for extended periods of time. The noise cancellation and transparency mode are really fantastic features that make going from noisy environments to areas where you need more awareness easy and responsive. My only real complaints are that the AirPods Pro are a little difficult to clean and grit/grime can keep them from charging. The phone calls can be hit or miss when it comes to audio but it’s usable for casual conversations. If you are traveling a lot or need some earbuds to walk around town, these are a great option and one that you should seriously consider even if you’ve had doubts about AirPods before.
* This post contains affiliate links to products on Amazon. These links pay me if readers click them.
