California Democratic Senator, Diane Feinstein introduces a senate bill requiring proof of vaccination or negative test result for domestic travel but fails to support it with data.
If you are considering booking travel or signing up for a new credit card please click here. Both support LiveAndLetsFly.com.
If you haven’t followed us on Facebook or Instagram, add us today.
The US Air Travel Public Safety Act
The bill proposed by octogenarian Senator, Diane Feinstein of California states that travelers must provide proof of full vaccination, the recent recovery of COVID-19, or a negative test result prior to flying for all domestic flights.
I, like many other travel writers and bloggers, generally oppose this requirement for a few reasons such as the damage to the travel industry already struggling to recover, the limited mobility of US citizens, and the slippery slope it creates but mostly because air travel is safe despite COVID.
This bill has a host of other issues that make it a non-starter.
Lack of Factual Basis
The bill outlines three groups the measure is intended to protect: airline employees, children, and the vulnerable:
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES[…]
Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on[…]
reduce passenger, crewmember, and airport personnel risk of exposure to COVID–19, decrease the risk of transmission of COVID–19 on board aircraft and to United States destination communities through air travel, and protect children and other vulnerable individuals by preventing further spread of COVID–19 in the United States.
However, many of the nation’s carriers already have a nearly completely vaccinated workforce. United is over 96%, Delta is over 80% for example. No one disputes the need to protect the vulnerable (though the CDC maintains against its unnecessary travel recommendation especially for the vulnerable.) But then the good senator puts “children” into the mix.
While more kids have recently tested positive for COVID-19, mortality is rare and co-morbidity data has not been released. The American Association of Pediatrics reports the following children mortality rates for COVID-19:
- Among states reporting, children were 0.00%-0.27% of all COVID-19 deaths, and 7 states reported zero child deaths
- In states reporting, 0.00%-0.03% of all child COVID-19 cases resulted in death
The basis of this legislation is to protect (vaccinated or frequently tested) airline employees, children who account for 0 to 0.27% of COVID deaths, and the vulnerable. The basis should simply be to protect the vulnerable but the inclusion of the employee segment is to demonstrate workers that do not have a choice in whether to be exposed or not, and of course to pull on the heartstrings with the inclusion of children though they represent little to no risk at all.
Children account for a relatively small amount of air travelers anyway, which further demonstrates the lack of necessity in including them as a basis for the bill.
While the bill states that this aligns with current statutes for international arrivals, it does not. US persons returning to the United States must provide a negative test regardless of vaccination status.
- (1) provide the covered air carrier with documentation demonstrating that the passenger is fully vaccinated (as defined by the Secretary or any successor guidance) against the COVID–19 (SARS–16 CoV–2) novel coronavirus;
This bill would remove the testing requirement that the rest of the federal government has kept in place. While vaccinated passengers would prefer not to have to test, due to breakthrough cases, the US international standard is effective in determining who has COVID; this bill doesn’t.
Natural Immunity Excluded
The term “fully vaccinated” excludes those that have natural immunity (recovered from COVID-19) but are outside of the first 90 days since infection. It also excludes those that have natural immunity and have one-shot of a two-shot vaccine, considered the “gold standard” in several Israeli papers. The scientific community has been clear with regards to two things about natural immunity:
- We do not know how long antibodies last naturally; and
- Natural immunity is considered stronger than that derived from the vaccine.
What we know about vaccination-derived antibodies are:
- We do not know how long antibodies last from the vaccine; and
- Vaccine immunity is considered weaker than that derived from natural antibodies.
Dr. Anthony Fauci was asked by Dr. Sanjay Gupta if there is a case for vaccinating those that still possess the antibodies from contracting COVID. Here’s that exchange:
One revision to Senator Feinstein’s bill that would be scientifically based would be to test for antibodies (and provide those results) in order to board an aircraft. If one has antibodies regardless of the source (vaccine or natural) then they would be as low risk as anyone else on the aircraft that had recovered from the virus in the last 90 days or was fully vaccinated.
Why is that not the standard? Antibody tests are cheap, widely available, less invasive than a COVID test, and apply to the largest contingent of US people.
The bill does not define “fully vaccinated” (it punts to “successor guidance”) but that is to presume it’s referring to completing both shots of a two-shot vaccine or the one-shot Johnson & Johnson. However, the international mandate outlines which vaccines are acceptable, this bill does not. While it’s unlikely a traveler would have a vaccine outside of the approved methods, the international version of this law is clear on what’s approved and what isn’t.
It also isn’t clear if “fully vaccinated” will require a booster for those who heretofore were considered fully vaccinated but fall into booster-recommended segments. If a two-shot vaccinated 65-year old wants to board an aircraft under this bill, must she also prove a third shot as that has now been recommended by the CDC (though for some categories Dr. Walensky did so against the advice of her own panel.)
The bill outlines what test result language is considered to be valid but is less clear about any excluded methods (the international standard is clear.) While I’m not asking for China’s method to be used, this bill is vague.
Evidence of Air Travel Contributing to the Spread of COVID-19
The biggest concern for this bill is not just the shoddy wording, mistargeting, nor vague areas but rather the lack of evidence that this is needed at all.
“We know that air travel during the 2020 holiday season contributed to last winter’s devastating COVID-19 surge. We simply cannot allow that to happen again,” Feinstein said.
Assuming that’s scientifically founded, the basis on last year’s holiday travel would be, frankly, stupid for the following reason: the vaccine wasn’t available. The first shots were given on December 14th, 2020 to extremely limited groups. The Senator is basing the need for this legislation on a time where no Americans were vaccinated and the only ones that held the antibodies were naturally immunized.
Further, despite millions of travelers passing through TSA every day, we have yet to link a superspreader event to a flight. There has been one case in Hong Kong and one in Ireland for which I am aware (please feel free to cite others in the comments) that has been a confirmed significant transmission point.
The tests from the US government in conjunction with United Airlines found that there is such a small chance that one would contract the virus onboard an aircraft that it was virtually impossible and that you’re far more likely to become a billionaire in the US or be struck by lightning than you are to contract aboard a plane due to its HEPA filtration systems, and mandated masks.
Unduly Harms Airlines
This bill does not have the same requirement for trains, nor buses, ships, nor cars. If airlines felt as though they were being targeted, they are. On the surface, this might make sense as airlines move more passengers than trains, ships, or buses (though not cars) however, none of those modes of transportation use the advanced air filtration that airplanes do.
Even with the passing of this bill, no vaccination paperwork, negative test results, nor recent recovery evidence is required for other modes of transportation. Carriers flying long-haul trans-continental trips won’t see much competition from Amtrak nor Greyhound, but San Francisco to Los Angeles, Houston to Dallas, Boston to Washington DC all would. That’s not fair to the airlines.
This concept has been floated in the media for some time as a never-ending temperature-taking on the public’s reaction to such a mandate. We have all heard and repeated “follow the science”, but from the motivation of its inception (last holiday travel period was bad) to its flawed beneficiaries (already vaccinated and highly tested employees, non-factor children) to its unintentionally ambiguous standard – yet this bill does anything but follows the science.
What do you think? Is this bill welcomed by you? Does it make sense according to the current factual and scieentific information available? Is this an overreach?
A significant percent of the population have declined to participate in the necessary public good task of vaccinating against Covid. Most are either incredibly ill-informed or willfully ignorant. The time has come for these outliers to either get vaccinated or make life as difficult as can be or otherwise, put them on the sideline. I’m sick of being held hostage by these fools.
And exactly how are you “held hostage by these fools”?
Mike your comments reflect the egregious and corrupted messaging that the left and media had propogated for months now. What about the millions of people who’ve had Covid and recovered and therefore have antibodies? You and the like refuse to even consider tbis. It’s vaccine or nothing fir you guys. This tribalism is what’s causing the country to be torn apart and it seems you genuinely hate the “other side”. Why don’t you try replacing “people who don’t want to get vaccinated” with Muslims or Hindus and see how that goes? After all, those who don’t want to get vaccinated beleive they don’t want it – so it’s a belief not unlike they believe in Allah or thier god.
“Why don’t you try replacing “people who don’t want to get vaccinated” with Muslims or Hindus and see how that goes?”
As comparisons go, that is beyond asinine.
I know several people who got covid around March or April 2020, recovered, and then got Covid again pre-vaccination earlier this year. Having Covid once definitely does not give you immunity for life. And most of those people who got covid a second time had it way worse (more debilitating, etc) the second time. NEarly all of them went and got the vaccine after their second visit with covid. No reason not to.
Regarding antibody levels as an indication of immunity – it appears that correlation has not been established, at least not yet, according to the following FDA statement: A positive antibody test does not necessarily mean you are immune from SARS-CoV-2 infection, as it is not known whether having antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 will protect you from getting infected again. It also does not indicate whether you can infect other people with SARS-CoV-2. (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/coronavirus-covid-19-and-medical-devices/antibody-serology-testing-covid-19-information-patients-and-consumers)
The last sentence (potentially passing the virus to others, even if you’re not adversely affected by it) is particularly concerning.
@Jake – I appreciate your thoughtful and measured approach. I think one area which represents a challenge is this:
“SARS-CoV-2 antibody (often referred to as serology) tests look for antibodies in a sample to determine if an individual has had a past infection with the virus that causes COVID-19. COVID-19 antibody tests can help identify people who may have been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus or have recovered from a COVID-19 infection.
At this time, researchers do not know whether the presence of antibodies means that you are immune to COVID-19; or if you are immune, how long it will last.
In people who have received a COVID-19 vaccination, antibody testing is not recommended to determine whether you are immune or protected from COVID-19.”
What might have been more effective is: “both in natural immunity and in vaccination, you a) may still get sick with COVID, b) may still transmit COVID, c) may be immune to COVID or some strains, and d) your antibodies that protect or reduce your illness, natural or from vaccination, may wane over time.”
The FDA is also saying that they have not approved of any antibody tests, but they also did not approve of booster shots either and had not cleared all of the vaccines prior to their. use.
I do not disagree with you that natural immunity might not protect forever, and while the study I found (and Dr. Fauci and Dr. Sanjay Gupta) discussed may demonstrate that natural immunity is stronger but other studies may counter it. But I think we could both agree that with 42million Americans surviving COVID, an incomplete immunity should be assessed further. This seems ignored, however.
This bill has zero chance of passing. Senate Republicans are guaranteed to filibuster it, and Democrats don’t have the 60 votes they’d need to overcome the filibuster.
The CDC calls Kyle “fake news”. Sorry and a little melodramatic.
New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection
Reduced Risk of Reinfection with SARS-CoV-2 After COVID-19 Vaccination — Kentucky, May–June 2021
It is possible that previous Covid infection results in highly variable immunity. Some have good immunity but some have very little. In contrasts, the vaccine gives fairly standardized immunity, which is good immunity with not that much variation among individuals.
I notice that @Kyle Stewart chose not to respond to your thoughtful, data-derived post. I would assume that it’s because he doesn’t have any good rebuttals.
I genuinely don’t understand why Matthew keeps you around, Kyle. Posts like this drag the credibility of the entire website down.
@Greg – Sorry, busy day.
1) I included the Israeli study as well as Fauci saying he “didn’t have a good answer for that” (being the need for naturally immunized to become vaccinated at all. The citations he has made from the FDA and CDC counter the ones I presented to some degree but also contradict Fauci in approach and statements. So to state that one is definitive over the other, I am not so sure I’d concede that, but I am also not dismissing his points as “fake news” even if other studies do. Just as an FDA panel stated they could not recommend boosters, and the CDC chair decided to do so anyway for specific groups (also cited in the work) there is room for not knowing the absolute answer. But standing behind one firmly and not another that is equally valid or (in some cases) flawed, is just as partisan as anything else.
2) The Mayo Clinic would dispute the last claim @Derek made (though I appreciate his comments) with regard to standardized immunity. They found Pfizer to be 42% effective against Delta, and Moderna to be 76% which is a massive chasm. To dismiss the natural immunity discussions because they “aren’t standardized” when effectiveness ranges wildly from vaccine to vaccine for the Delta variant would also then dismiss the argument that the vaccines provide a more standardized immunity. https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-vaccines-pfizer-moderna-delta-biden-e9be4bb0-3d10-4f56-8054-5410be357070.html
New CDC Study: Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection
It is possible that previous Covid infection results in highly variable immunity. Some have good immunity but some have very little. In contrasts, the vaccine gives fairly standardized immunity, which is good immunity with not that much variation among individuals.
The senile old broad doesn’t have a clue. This will never pass.
It makes no sense to require vaccine certiicates from Europe with lower COVID rates but not from Floridians.
Have you looked at Florida’s rates the past 3 weeks? Didn’t think so.
But good job on pushing the liberal talking points.
UA-NYC would be proud.
Yes you sound like someone who was born 3 weeks ago. Perhaps you meant we should have required FL vaccines even earlier?
I feel sorry for any member of your family who had or will get intubated because of listening to your nonsense.
@NB – I don’t necessarily disagree, but with breakthrough cases, is the COVID test not the ultimate standard? It’s clear that vaccinated people are able to get COVID and transmit it to others, and while the effects on their own health may be lesser, it’s not a lesser version of COVID that they pass on to others. So if we really want to stop the spread, the COVID test remains the best possible option, right?
Simple solution. Mandate vaccinations for everyone who the FDA says can get one. No exceptions. 700,000 dead Americans and The Trump Party wants to make vaccines and masks about politics. The anti-science party wants its vision of liberty to outweigh everyone else’s. And Kyle, sure interesting to see what the United Airlines mandate did. Everyone got a vaccine but for less than 300 people who can surely find a job as a bartender or at a fast food drive through.
When you speak about parties politicizing medical advancements don’t forget about this one: https://youtu.be/-dAjCeMuXR0
It would suck to be on the wrong side of history and potentially contribute to the death of one of your readers or someone that acquires covid from one of your readers. At a minimum there should be a disclaimer at the top of this post stating that this article contains the opinion of someone who is not a doctor and who has no medical education whatsoever. My spouse is a doctor working in the ER, and they’ve had a constant stream of kids coming in suffering complications from covid.
@Luke – It’s a travel blog and that’s pretty clear; if someone is taking medical advice that’s not on me. I’m not sure where your spouse works, but your description simply doesn’t align with the statistics. That’s not me saying it, it’s the AAP and Johns Hopkins.
But to your verbose primary statement, my goodness, please don’t hold back on my account. Tell me which one of my statements would have or could have contributed to the death of a reader? Every single point has been substantiated by external sources. What exactly has you so… passionate?
Yet here you are, giving medical advice to the aviation industry.
Know your lane.
Hey Kyle, thanks for the reply and for approving my comment. What has me so passionate is that people are dying and healthcare workers are being unnecessarily pushed to exhaustion thanks to a continued propagation of a narrative that is not based on science. I realize that you probably believe that the post’s links to a curated selection of publications frees the post of any responsibility, but I’d disagree. This pandemic would be largely over in the US if the other half of our eligible population would simply get the vaccine. My comment was not a personal attack. The narrative that the post contributes to is essentially that any vaccine requirement is an act of government infringement upon our personal freedoms rather than an effort to save lives.
What truly damages the travel industry is a pandemic that we can’t get under control because getting a vaccine or wearing a mask has become political.
My spouse works at an ER in the Houston area of Texas. If you’d like proof of kids suffering complications of covid, you could stop by almost any pediatric ER in the southern portion of the US and get a look.
@Luke – I love a spirited debate between level-headed parties who are willing to listen to one another. Thank you. I don’t disagree with some of what you’ve said. I’m not anti-vaccine, but I am against not having a choice and I am against avoiding or dismissing valid science. No one is talking about natural immunity. No one. It exists and while the instant argument is that we do not know how long it lasts (valid), it’s also true that we do not know how long the vaccines last either. I’m not sure why one is valid and the other is not especially when 42 million fall into some stage of the natural immunity side of things.
I don’t disagree that kids are getting sick, I’m a coach on a little league team and there are kids who have been sick and games that have to be delayed as a result. But statistically, it’s a minute portion and I think we could both agree that it was not put into the bill because they are uniquely at risk.
Lastly, on the politicization, we pretty much agree on this one too. When Trump was in office, it was operation warp speed or whatever and to his credit, he removed barriers to get the vaccines through, is vaccinated himself, and encouraged others to get the jab. It was Biden and Harris that stated they were skeptical and wouldn’t get the jab, and President Biden as a candidate stated he would not mandate the vaccine. Then, with the election results, everyone switched their positions and so did their supporters. Remember that Biden once called closing the borders with China and then Europe “xenophobic” but then kept the policy and added additional requirements when he took office. Neither party is blameless on this one.
Hey Kyle, I think we could go back and forth forever and not ever change one another’s minds on certain things.
My view is that Trump took credit for the vaccine up until Biden won, then subsequently he got the vaccine in secret without telling anyone until he was absolutely forced to. Yes, he gave the green light on operation warp speed, which was a crucial green light. But since the election he’s only encouraged the vaccine when put on the spot about it. And he’s always mocked the use of masks, which is how that was politicized in the US. As for Biden, my view is that he didn’t say much about the vaccine during that portion of his campaign because it didn’t exist yet as a completed product and definitely had not received any kind of approval yet. In a time when a president was recommending bleach for treatment (joking or not), I think he wanted to leave the medical recommendations up to the pros.
I’ve never said that either party is blameless, but I am saying that there is one party whose constituents have a much lower vaccination rate, and that is not by coincidence. I understand your viewpoint because unless I’d veered away from the evangelical, Hannity-watching social circle that I grew up in, I would probably have a very similar viewpoint. I don’t blame you for your worldview because most of us self-perpetuate the views we already hold by choosing to consume content that aligns with those views.
You said that kids getting sick is a minute % of the cases, but across millions of covid cases in our country, that “minute” number starts to get huge (especially for the families of those children who are just a statistic). I think you would be shocked about the reality of the current situation if you went and interviewed a few pediatric ER physicians to get their view on things.
On vaccine requirements- no one is taking away anyone’s choice to get it. Anyone can choose not to get it, and that will always be the case in the US, no matter how many ‘slippery slope’ arguments people make. If someone wants to fly without putting other people’s kids at risk though, I agree with the idea of requiring them to take the simple step that will reduce the spread of covid, which is getting vaccinated. In response to the inevitable “there’s no proof that vaccinated people spread the virus less than unvaccinated people” argument: To spread covid, you’ve gotta have covid, and vaccinated people are far less likely to acquire covid. There’s loads of proof of that.
ICUs are still full of covid patients right now in many areas of our country, and ~99.9% of them are unvaccinated. Patients with other illnesses are dying because they can’t get ICU beds thanks to an illness that is now completely preventable for adults in our country. If my comment upsets anyone, I would beg them to go volunteer in their local hospital to get a taste of the reality healthcare workers are facing right now.
The CDC responds to the natural immunity question here-
Kyle seems to enjoy playing devil’s advocate, and it makes for great clickbait. Although as others have noted here in the comments, much of his commentary is contrarian or just plain wrong. Also, I find it interesting that you placed this in the context of Finestein of being an octogenarian, seems like you are playing quite close with ageism. I agree with the policy though, which makes travel as difficult for those that do not want to get vaccinated. New Zealand Airlines and the Canadian government just instituted similar policies. If you want to travel, you need to be vaccinated or tested plain and simple.
See other comment on “ageism” qualified as nothing more than stating the correct age of a public figure within a decade.
As for the rest, I haven’t seen a statistic, fact, or link with which you have disagreed or proven incorrect. I don’t even know that this qualifies as contrarian as most have stated that this bill would be DOA, but heaven forbid a contrary point of view would be on display. I’ll try to get more on the approved talking points next week.
Look, we know your deal by now. You lack the intelligence or insight to say anything truly interesting. So you post garbage like this.
Maybe yell at another flight attendant because they didn’t give you another snack pack. Your blood sugar must be a bit low.
The Senator’s age is irrelevant, and by stating that unnecessary fact, the reader can only assume you’re taking a shot at her. Perhaps you weren’t, but it very much seemed that way. In fact, only one sentence in to this post, I could tell it was going to be politically motivated.
If the vaccine doesn’t protect you from the unvaccinated… what exactly is the point of the vaccine (or getting vaccinated)?
It’s circular logic, and there is a reason frequent fliers like me have no interest in being vaccinated for this disease. Hard pass.
Especially as the reasons to do so get more and more absurd.
@George: Oy. You went to all of that trouble to get into medical school to become an epidemiologist and you don’t understand anything about Covid, its transmission, nor herd immunity. The idiot anti-vaxxers are dying by the thousands every single day and overwhelming ICUs all over the country.
They are having to prioritize who gets treated and who dies in Alaska. Have you considered moving to Alaska George? Big state!! But what ever ya do, don’t get sick! And don’t get hit by a drunk driver who crossed the centerline and hits you head-on cuz you aren’t going to get treated for your physical or mental issues. Get your vaccine or don’t leave your basement-ever. And the reason to get vaccinated is so that you don’t die or kill some innocent kid cuz you’re an asymptotic carrier. Send a postcard from Anchorage please.
Probability of spreading the virus (Alpha) by unvaccinated ~37%. Probability of spreading Delta by fully vaccinated !~35%. Just to have a perspective
Give Kyle a break. It’s his one day of the week to make his mark. It’s God’s day off…let the clickbait roll.
So the challenge is UA-NYC both put up $5k for a charity of Matt’s choosing for a fun bet of who has flown more miles in 2021. No winner other than the charity.
But I’m also willing to put $5k up on more money to charity on UA’s claims, all on loser pays to the charity of Matt’s choice based on his claims.
$5,000 that my wife doesn’t weight 300 pounds
$5,000 that I don’t live in the Villages of Florida
$5,000 that I can prove I have a net worth of more than the IP address we can agree on is UA-NYC
$5,000 that I can prove I own homes in Florida and Lake Tahoe Nevada
So an easy $10k for charity with an opportunity to $20k more if UA is willing to back the claims he makes with his trolling here.
The ball is in UA’s court, Matt knows who I am. Is UA willing to prove who he is?
The Internet is full of losers and whack-jobs…congrats on winning first place today
In other words you are walking away from an opportunity for a charity to get s10,000.
My money will be wherever Matt wants it tomorrow by 11AM, will yours?
Unwilling to put your money where your mouth is?
Sounds like you have been put in your place.
Yes, you are a rich man who lives a fulfilling life. That’s why you’re sh*tposting on a friggin avgeek comment section. You clearly have it all together.
(Nobody cares and most folks don’t believe you. Find somewhere else to crazy.)
Never said I’m rich in a world where 20 somethings are making millions in Bitcoin and stock manipulation. Just retired early in my mid 50’s with enough money to live comfortably and travel a lot. And yes, it gets boring at time but I’ve committed to never working and paying taxes again whenever legally possible.
As for you believing me, doesn’t matter. It only matters if Matt is going to push for UA and I to donate $10k to a charity of his choice. The rest we know UA won’t wager on and honestly I doubt he will put up the &5k, even if he actually has it.
No no UA NYC would love to take that bet under one condition- other people’s money would be at risk !!
It might take a while for UA to respond as they are probably in orgasmic rapture since their hero Werner Wilhelm says he going to run for governor!! If UA could vote for good old Werner for a third time they would. That’s from the safety of mommas basement or their tent controlled apartment in the upper West side or Park Slope…..
The most productive thing Feinstein could do in America today, is actually get COVID.
So you’re making a donation to charity contingent on a favorable outcome in some comment board pissing match? How noble.
It’s hard to take a “journalist” or a blogger of any kind seriously when ageist language is used to explain any position. I’m referring to you, Kyle. Such language weakens your credibility and renders your opinions worthless.
I said nothing ageist at all. If I were to describe Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as the “31-year-old freshman Representative” that wouldn’t be ageist, right? It would just be a fact, but when I mention an “octogenarian” and her tenure in the senate (30 years next month) that’s somehow ageist? Is the Senator 88 years old? Is she an octogenarian? Why does mentioning this make me an ageist and less credible? Have you applied a stigma to octogenarians that make you think this is a detractor? If so, that’s not really on any of my prejudices, but rather yours, right?
Here are some other outlets that now have worthless credibility as a result of mentioning the senator’s age within a decade category, Scott:
Los Angeles Times: https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-06-24/elderly-democrats-say-feinstein-breyer-need-to-retire
The New Yorker: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/dianne-feinsteins-missteps-raise-a-painful-age-question-among-senate-democrats
This could go on and on and on. The point is that stating a person’s age by itself is not ageist, if you have negative feelings toward octogenarians, that’s up to you, not me.
Your attempt to play dumb here is quite telling, and for the record it isn’t fooling anybody.
Every link you’ve posted is in reference to an article where the senator’s age / abilities was the topic of discussion.
Meanwhile, your choice to insert “octogenarian” here was an agiest pot shot, nothing more.
You got my click this time, but I’ll know not to bother in the future when I see your name in the byline.
Get your jab and STFU freedumb tards!
Kyle: You were ageist. There was no reason for you to bring up Feinstein’s age. You opposed her bill but the fact that she is 88 years old had nothing to do w/the bill being written as she (and her staff) wrote it.
The articles you cite argue that Feinstein might be too old at an “old 88” to do the job of a US Senator and are not ageist as her age is THE issue in those articles.
Here’s an example that you might rightly find objectionable: Clarence Thomas, a Black Supreme Court Justice voted to overturn Roe v Wade. Sorry Kyle but it does weaken your argument and damages your credibility.
What does him being Black have to do w/that vote?
Saying that she is an octogenarian is not ageist, she is and I suspect that if asked, she wouldn’t shy away from it. Chuck Grassley is even older (89) and if re-elected (I’m not sure he’s decided to run or not), he’d be 95 at the end of his term. If articles bring this up, it doesn’t mean that they are ageist because they mention his exact age (something I didn’t do); facts are not ageist, nor sexist, nor is the mention of these facts.
Any chance you have a substantive argument against the numerous citations and points made on the actual piece, or nah?
Kyle: Duh. How about taking the time to read your own articles-I did. The substantive response, which I’ve already articulated but you chose not to actually read the words I wrote, is that in your articles, the issue in each article is whether Feinstein is too old. Your argument is not that she is too old or anything about her other than you don’t like her bill.
You are an entitled white guy who is misinformed about Covid and ageism.
See: I could have just said you were misinformed about Covid and ageism but throwing in the “entitled white guy” was as gratuitous and dumb as you using the word “octogenarian”. Get it???
And Grassley is gonna run again cuz well, who doesn’t need a 95 year old Senator to serve w/Feinstein. They can vie for first to die of natural causes. Strom Thurmond made it to 100 but probably didn’t know it because he had suffered a significant and substantive decline in his cognitive skills.
It’s hard for a person to recognize when they have erred but one w/integrity recognizes it when it is graciously pointed out to them.
600k dead. Mostly because people like you lack any facility for critical thought (but can’t admit it).
This entire article makes it clear your “research” consists of clicking on whatever posts Facebook thinks you’ll like. Natural immunity, huh? Must be why vaccinations never really took off.
You have no idea what you’re talking about. You barely understand the aviation industry.
agree w/Dan. 700,000 dead. one out of every 500. And the idiots say no mandates, no masks because there really is no problem at all and gosh, many airlines have good vaccination rates. The best airline for vaccination rates is United and they got there because they mandated them. And everyone else who can, should get their shot too. Especially meatheads who seem to think their personal choice (being stupid) Trumps everyone else. Kyle should be ashamed of himself. He cherry picks his facts to be the anti-vaxxer he is. Boo on Kyle who doesn’t even know that Feinstein is older than Grassley!
@BigBird – you haven’t refuted a single fact included in the piece. You’ve added hyperbole and stated all of mine were wrong or cherry-picked, but haven’t really included any factual refutations. Further, would you be refuting the AAP, the FDA, Dr. Fauci or just me when I post their words?
This won’t go well with the Spirit/Frontier/Allegiant/AA crowd.
I’m shocked at the ignorance related to the topic covered by the author and respectfully now know to ignore future articles by Kyle
Airlines paint the story all rosy, as do travel agents and apparently now travel bloggers. It may be true limited in- flight transmissions have been published , but you missed the one landing in Australia had a large# of confirmed onboard transmissions (pre delta variant as well). The study showed clearly that the passengers had no other contact besides sitting in nearby rows.
The time onboard a flight is just one small portion— significant spread is happening to TSA agents, to hotel clerks, and airport bar/restaurant workers, hotel/rental shuttle drivers
Lowering unvaccinated/untested travel by all populations, ESPECIALLY children, is better for all of the country.
@Mark. Thanks for reading and for commenting, though I fear you won’t see this response. I asked for additional cases of airline transmission and you’ve identified a third case in addition to the two I included. However, I’d still have to ask that if travel is the most dangerous place (all of the travel restrictions and limitations) yet millions are flying every day, why are there only three cases. Plenty of readers have seen this content and disagreed with various points, but yours is the only additional example of actual cases linked to flights in addition to my two examples. There are more than a quarter-billion confirmed cases, untold tens if not hundreds of millions more unaccounted (asymptomatic, pre-testing availability, misdiagnosed, etc.) yet less than 500 people on airplanes despite tens of millions of travelers every week in the US alone.
That is statistically insignificant (1:578,000) – your chances of getting struck by lightning are 1:700,000, chances of becoming a billionaire in the US are 1:778,000. We don’t all stop going outside because you could be struck by lightning, flying is statistically the same.
Currently enjoying some time in western Europe. FYI- they do consider previous infection as proof of immunity. But of course we all know that Europe is filled with right wing, fox news crazed conspiracy nuts.
I spent hours refreshing websites and drove 4 hours to get vaccinated. And quite frankly I find the reluctance to be odd. But who cares? We either follow the data and the science or we don’t.
We now have 2 administrations in a row more interested in “winning” than creating sound public policy.
Congrats America, you figured out an excuse to hate each other even more than usual. You all need to chill out. On both sides of the debate.
Kumbaya! We had one administration that was anti-vaccine, anti-masking, and anti social distancing. Now we have one that is in favor of all of those things. Let’s agree that we should unify around mandatory vaccinations, masks, and distancing and achieve and maintain a herd immunity, and then we can go back to simply the Democratic policy v the Trumpistas (there is no Republican Party anymore).
So after one side “wins” we can all be friends again? Good luck with that.
You miss the point. There are no winners on this path. Just varying degrees of loss.
Covid has tragically taken a lot of lives. The path of dehumanizing the other side risks a far greater loss of life and the end of a liberal democratic society.
Obviously that is hyperbolic and an extreme outcome. But study history and more specifically genocide and you’ll find that dehumanizing the “other” is always the first step. Step two is manufactured crisis. Step three is a promise of safety and security in exchange for punishing the “others”.
Some compromise and respect for varying opinions is what keeps democracy vibrant. Not laws.
Kumbaya indeed. Not darn thing wrong with that.
I do not think there were good people on both sides in Charlottesville. I do not believe that are sane people who are against vaccinations. Good luck getting the Trumpers to get vaccinated unless it’s mandated and they loses their job if they don’t. NYC and United Airlines are doing great w/mandates. Everybody should have one!
I appreciate the honest debate.
But reject your all or nothing philosophy as counterproductive. I’m vaccinated.
Was in NYC two weeks ago. Only had my easily forged card checked maybe 1 in 3 times. Is that good policy?
Trump was a disaster in every sense and should never have been nominated let alone elected. But he wasn’t wrong in that statement despite being entirely wrong with the sentiment. It’s nuance. Of course there are good people who make bad choices or are misguided. Any notion to the contrary is ridiculous to the point of being Trumpian in its own regard.
And this path of scorched earth politics that the Dems seem to be unable to veer from will likely lead to a Republican house & senate in about 18 months and another 4 years of Trump in 2024. I promise you’ll want the filibuster in place if it does.
Ha, actually gonna correct myself here… Trump’s sentiment was OK. That their are good people who make bad choices.
It was his motivation for saying it that was likelywrong.
He has no ability to make any statement that isn’t 100% in his own best interest. But I reiterate my point that the Democratic party in its current form is working harder to re-elect him than anyone in the Republican hierarchy, who likely hate him the most for hijacking the party.
No vaccine, no fly is the only way to get rid of the mask mandate. I support. If it puts the screws to the unvaccinated, even better.
I do think proof of COVID recovery should serve as an exemption to the vaccination requirement, but it must be time bound by what the science tells us is the typical lifespan of natural immunity.
I was referring to the State of NY mandating vaccines.
United Airlines had to fire less than 300 people out of 67,000 employees. If your job is on the line, unless you are Kyrie Irving, you are going to get vaccinated. All in for mandates.
Kyrie is simply nuts and no, the earth is not flat and cigarettes are not good for you!
Kyle your post leaves me confused and somewhat upset for two reasons: 1) This blog encourages folks to get vaccinated, see Matt’s post here: https://liveandletsfly.com/covid-19-vaccine-virtue-signaling/. Your post seems to take fault in mandatory vaccinations for air travelers -what’s the big deal if people are vaccinated? 2) Believe you have a young child yourself but you state that Covid infections for kids are not a factor as no risks of death – please google “long term effects for children who have Covid 19”. NO scientific proof yet in how bad the impact can be but why take a chance?
@Norbert – Thanks for reading and for commenting. I am happy to clarify a few things.
1) I’m not anti-vax but I think it should remain a personal choice. There’s no allowance for people who genuinely cannot get the vaccine (risks associated with their personal health) or don’t yet need it as Dr. Gupta brought up. I find it beguiling that 42 million Americans may still have immunity that could be stronger than vaccination immunity and yet no one is discussing this.
2) I didn’t state that at all. I stated that the inclusion of kids in the language of the bill was to pull on heartstrings but not protect a seriously embattled class of travelers. For example, let’s say that men with red hair had 0.0-0.27% of all COVID deaths. If the bill read “to protect airline employees, men with red hair, and the vulnerable” and we found the “men with red hair” to be statistically insignificant, then the question would be why is it specifically included?
Whoever wants to get the vaccine should have it (not just here but globally which Biden is distributing through taxpayer money to the tune of 500 million doses.) But I disagree with being forced to get a vaccine that you may not need when scientifically there’s not yet proof that the natural immune need it.
The bill is poorly written on a baseless premise and that’s really the crux of the issue for me.
Hi Kyle and appreciate the response – let me put it another way and maybe this helps me understand your position – would you support any bill requiring vaccination with some different language (minus reference to risks for kids etc?) and some reference to those who may already be immune (though no idea where the 42 Million may come from)
@Norbert – I don’t support any required or mandated vaccination without clauses for those who cannot take it for some approved reason or don’t need it at all. And if those who cannot or do not need it are approved for a waiver, then that should be treated the same as vaccinated.
The 42 million is the amount of confirmed COVID cases in the US that have survived. For those that still have the antibodies from their recovery (could be some, could be all – we don’t know because we don’t test for this) they may not need the vaccine at all. Dr. Fauci (in the video clip I included) was asked about this from Dr. Sanjay Gupta and he didn’t have “a good answer” for why they should be inoculated.
The other thing that we don’t hear about anymore is asymptomatic cases. How many of those are out there? What about those who may have had a fever for two days but none of the rest of the symptoms, recovered, and never tested? At one point this number was estimated in the millions. If that’s the case, then the 42 million just got larger to an unknown quantity of people for which may possess adequate antibodies and not need the vaccine right now – maybe not ever because we don’t know how long it lasts.