Please sign in to post.

What's stopping you from traveling?

what are your fears for traveling? Mine is that I will be put in mandatory isolation after I come back from travel. Please tell me your thoughts and also where we are at in terms of being allowed to travel.

Posted by
7049 posts

I don't have any particular fears of travel. I just don't want to be an unwitting contributor to the chain of transmission of a virus to folks a lot more vulnerable than me. I also don't want to be potentially knocked out of commission for two weeks or more, and to feel miserable and weak - I have better things to do with my time. Or to tax the health system which is already way out of control as a share of the economy (~ 18%) and is likely to get even more expensive and less accessible. Travel is not a "must" for me, it's a "nice to have". So it can wait.

I can turn the question around and ask why others seem so anxious and impatient about traveling right now when all the public health guidance points to limiting movement (including international travel), not congregating in large crowds, social distancing, stopping the spread, etc.

Posted by
4527 posts

My stumbling block is that I can't leave Canada without undergoing mandatory isolation upon return. I am essential services, so can't afford that sort of time off and work isn't allowing it anyway. As I don't typically travel in the summer anyway, I am just on hold waiting for updates on when Canadians can re-enter without isolation requirements.

Posted by
8378 posts

I am not fearful, I am cautious. What stops me from traveling, besides the fact that nowhere I want to go is open to letting me in, is my lack of faith in other travelers' compliance with basic health precautions.

Posted by
7453 posts

I dunno, maybe the fact that unless I am a resident I can't get into many Countries might be a contributor.

Posted by
11056 posts

1.EU won’t let Americans in.
2.Fear of catching coronavirus by traveling for no important reason. We are doing a domestic trip( important to us for many reasons) to get out of Arizona, high rates of virus, heat and so we will take the risk to be in a safer place near our family. May move.

Posted by
1936 posts

Agnes said all I wanted to say. I have elderly parents and work in a small office. I really wouldn't like to infect anyone or have them infect me. Plus given that I have been sick after every overseas plane trip, I'd rather not get COVID-19.

There is always next year and it will probably be better travel wise as scientists will know more about the virus and how to combat it better. Luckily there is a whole internet full of travel related stuff.

Posted by
6386 posts

I have no fears. The EU not allowing those from the U.S. in, and the U.S. not allowing to travel are the only things holding me back.

Posted by
3514 posts

I am not fearful of traveling. I just see no reason to do it right now. I have plenty of things to keep me busy that I have put off for many years while I was traveling, so now is a good time to get them done. Travel will be there when I feel the need to get out and do it.

And of course, most places I would be traveling to right now won't let me in or if they will most of the sights I would like to see in those places are closed.

Posted by
1662 posts

Well...the uncertainty. Since I am an American, Italy is not allowing us in as of yet. Things could change in a few months. Who knows?

Ahh, I could apply for citizenship in Italy by descent (jure sanguinis) So...if I had that other Passport, "maybe" I could enter Italy. Still...not sure if I would now anyway....many things are still topsy turvy with the reawakening. One of my friends who lives about an hour outside of Rome but works in Rome says there is still a lot of slow treading.

Posted by
3874 posts

What are your fears for traveling? Mine is that I will be put in mandatory isolation after I come back from travel.

You may not need to travel internationally to realise that specific fear, hot off the press (BBC):

The US states of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut will require visitors from Covid-19 hotspots elsewhere in the country to quarantine for 14 days, officials have said. The quarantine rule will apply to visitors from states where 10% of the population is infected with Covid-19 on a seven-day rolling average.

Nine states, including Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Washington, Utah and Texas, currently meet that high infection rate threshold. The quarantine will come into effect on Thursday.

Posted by
89 posts

I don't have any fear - I don't think the risk of catching covid is worse in any other country then here in the US. I work in healthcare and have spoken to doctors who said that this virus is here to stay and we will have to learn to live with it. I have a trip to England scheduled in September and if the self quarantine requirement is lifted I'll be going.

Posted by
8378 posts

Carlos, do you mean 10% of test results being positive, is the threshold? Ten percent of the population would mean 3 million people just in Texas.

Posted by
9462 posts

I just don't want to be an unwitting contributor to the chain of transmission of a virus to folks a lot more vulnerable than me.

Agnes said it perfectly.

Posted by
3874 posts

@Stan, it's 10% daily positive result of seven-day rolling average, I posted detailing more in Beyond Europe section, not to derail this particular topic ;-)

Posted by
4256 posts

Being quarantined or sick somewhere other than my own home.

Posted by
60 posts

No fear but Concern that
sights will be closed, even though they were
open just prior to my travel start date.

Posted by
10344 posts

I won't travel internationally, and probably not domestic trips requiring flying, until there's an effective covid vaccine.

Posted by
1174 posts

No fear but we've already had to cancel trips to two states because authorities implemented restrictions after we'd booked plane and hotel reservations. Maine requires a negative test within 72 hours prior to arrival and our flights were on a Tuesday. Good luck getting a test 72 hours prior. Friday? Not within 72 hours. Monday? Not a chance of getting a result before departing. Alaska is another that has cancelled guided trips to some famous sights after we had booked them earlier this year. Another issue that troubles us is that any local official -- city, county, or state -- can without notice, implement restrictions a few days prior to our departure and we'd be stuck in a 14 day quarantine. It's just not worth the trouble right now. Guess we'll drive to a few nearby states for our late summer trip this year. And that's not all bad either.

Posted by
504 posts

Europe won't let us in. Don't want to spend the whole vacation in quarantine.

Posted by
1576 posts

We have to re-invent ourselves as travelers at the moment. I love traveling to Europe like most posters on here. I look forward to it every year planning a trip to various European destinations. However, quality of health is the uttermost important. We are trying to heal and maintaining safety right now as a nation until a vaccine is readily available. It's not feasible right now to explore the world. The alternative is we can start doing more driving road trips to state, national Parks, or coastal resort towns to enjoy the outdoors. As savvy travelers, we can also look at state with low case counts to possibly travel to. We just have to think outside the box and be creative. 2020 don't have to be a total washout as far as traveling somewhere to getaway and recharge.

Stay Positive my friends,
Rjean

Posted by
52 posts

why will I travel to Italy if they’ll let me in? It’s because I’m 76 years old and who knows what will happen in another 12 months!

Posted by
90 posts

No one will let me in!

Seriously - we were booked for May and obviously canceled. We live just outside of NYC and saw the belly of the beast. Even though we are healthy and in our mid-40s, we have a healthy fear of this virus. I do not want to be a carrier and harm someone else.

But - as soon as they let me, I will go somewhere. I am ITCHING to travel but will only do so if 1) precautions are taken and 2) things are open. I am not going to spend weeks of valuable vacation time to wander around empty European cities. I am an art and history obsessive, and window shopping loses its charm very quickly for me.

Posted by
3218 posts

I have no fears for traveling. But I do like for restaurants, museums, etc. at my destinations to be open. And, I really hate wearing a mask - it makes me claustrophobic. So for the time being, my travels are limited to only the most essential of trips. Yes - I always wear masks when I can't practice social distancing.

Posted by
1972 posts

"I just don't want to be an unwitting contributor to the chain of transmission of a virus to folks a lot more vulnerable than me."

That is my feeling as well.

I also would not want to catch this and not be near home. My husbands coworker was lucky and made it back to the US, but back east, not home to here in Seattle, and it has been almost 5 months now. Seeing how sick he has been with this really makes you pay attention.

The other aspect for me is having medical insurance for a trip overseas. Ours does not cover us, and most trip insurance ones did not, so for the next trip we need to look into that specifically.

Posted by
3200 posts

I agree with Agnes!

I don't have any particular fears of travel. I just don't want to be an unwitting contributor to the chain of transmission of a virus to folks a lot more vulnerable than me. I also don't want to be potentially knocked out of commission for two weeks or more, and to feel miserable and weak - I have better things to do with my time. Or to tax the health system which is already way out of control as a share of the economy (~ 18%) and is likely to get even more expensive and less accessible. Travel is not a "must" for me, it's a "nice to have". So it can wait.

Posted by
521 posts

As a teacher who uses my summers to travel, this is the first summer in years I haven’t spent in Europe. I was fortunate enough to travel to Europe over the February break, but the wanderlust is strong! Other than the fact that I’m not welcome in the EU now, the other thing that is keeping me from traveling is the fear of getting COVID-19 in a foreign country. 10 years ago, I became very ill living in Italy and had a nightmare experience dealing with the public health system. I can’t risk that happening again, so I will probably not travel until a vaccine is available. I would be more willing to travel to England or Ireland before a vaccine is available. Perhaps it’s the fact that I wouldn’t be dealing with a language barrier if I had to get medical help.

Posted by
32173 posts

What's stopping me from travelling? Where to begin......

  • At the present time, Europe is not admitting visitors from outside the E.U. Therefore I couldn't go there even if I wanted to. Of course this may change after July 1st.
  • As someone else mentioned, I don't want to be placed in mandatory quarantine for 14 days when I return home. That would be a darn nuisance!
  • At least for the next few months, travelling in Europe may be a bit awkward and "different".... some hotels & restaurants closed, limited hours at some sights, limited rail schedules, etc. I'd prefer to wait until things are a bit more "normal" (realizing of course that nothing will be normal until there's a vaccine).
  • I have some definite concerns about sitting in one or more aluminum tubes for 14 hours or more, as well as spending time in crowded airports. I would have to wear a face mask as that's a firm rule, and I might consider adding a full face shield during the flight as well. I'd prefer for things to stabilize to a greater degree before trying air travel again. I've thought about trying a short one hour domestic flight just to see what air travel is like under the new rules, but flights at the moment are still a bit "sparse". WestJet announced today that 3,300 of their employees will be losing their jobs permanently and Air Canada has laid-off 20,000 employees, so this is not a good time for the airline industry or air travel.
  • At the present time, I can't afford a European trip, although might be able to manage a short trip of about 10 days.
  • My biggest concern with not only European travel but also travel to other provinces in Canada is travel medical insurance. It's very possible that premiums will be considerably higher than in the past, especially for someone in my age bracket with a few medical problems, and of course the coverage will not include Covid-19.
  • I really don't want to put myself at higher risk of contracting Covid-19, as it would probably be fatal. We're doing extremely well at managing the virus here in B.C. so I'd prefer to stay in a location where I'm relatively safe and able to engage in almost normal activities without wearing a mask (going to the gym, going to a restaurant or movie, going to a Pub, shopping, etc. - the barber is the only place I have to wear a mask). We moved into Phase 3 of the reopening plan today, so I'm now free to travel within B.C. so I'd like to take a few short trips by car to visit a few places that I've wanted to see for awhile. The provincial government is encouraging us to travel within B.C. this summer to support local tourist businesses, so I want to do my part.

At the moment, I'll have to be satisfied to remember Europe through the many photos I've taken over the years. I have a selection loaded onto a digital photo frame in my living room, and I switch it on every day.

Posted by
1576 posts

Ken once the Vaccine becomes available hopefully in the fall then you can start planning your European trips for next summer. Until then, tour B.C as you mentioned and explore new towns by driving. This year is a lost year as far as international travel. Stay within your geographical area and do short road trips for the summer.

Posted by
226 posts

To Europe? Government travel restrictions. Crossing my fingers for October trip.

Within the U.S.? Mostly nothing, except for the 14-day quarantine requirement instituted by Hawaii state government.

Posted by
10344 posts

I won't do travel involving flying, hotel stays, etc., until an effective vaccine is available and I'm able to be vaccinated.
I'm in quadruple high risk categories and my doctor has emphatically stated: "Don't catch it" (he didn't have to add the rest).

Another factor in my thinking, that has just arisen in the last week or so, is the significant spiking of covid infections in states and communities that have, in just the last, say 2 weeks, relaxed their lockdowns and have as a result seen informal gatherings of extended family members and friends in homes, restaurants, etc., that is, socializing or being close to persons not living with you).

An example of the possible effect of relaxing behavior would be: the Governor of California has just said that a slight relaxation of restrictions has resulted in a 25% rise in infections in California in the last two weeks.

Considering the above, there's no way I'm going to airports, getting on airplanes for long flights, etc. For me, it would be negligent, even reckless, for me and my wife.

Of course, others are free to make different decisions for themselves and their loves ones. Yep, we're each free to make decisions affecting the health, and even the lives, of ourselves and our loved ones.

Posted by
185 posts

I agree with Stan and Agnes. In particular, I have no desire to get on a crowded plane with recirculated air and other passengers who may not have been wearing masks and social distancing.

Posted by
492 posts

The universe doesn't need me taking up a seat on the plane, or generating a 6 ft radius around me wherever I go that others need to stay out of. So I guess my "fear" (less a fear, more the reasoning behind why I'm not traveling) is I just don't want to be an inconvenience to others.

I'm certain travel will again be something we can do comfortably, and without exposing others to any unnecessary risk (whether to those we encounter while traveling and abroad, or those we return home to) in due time, so am fine with waiting for that time to arrive.

Posted by
703 posts

Using the word 'fear' is unfortunate. Having said that, there are certainly folks that have a fear of travel at this time. With age and diagnoses that the experts then label her 'vulnerable,' my wife is fearful. Like others above have indicated, I believe that understanding the seriousness of the problem, attempting to follow the advice of physicians and local authorities, and, yes, common sense (like Carol said) cause me to not travel. For me I don't think that is fear.

Posted by
4256 posts

Good answer Carol. Can you get some of that transplanted into other people?

Posted by
2767 posts

I don’t want to inadvertently spread the virus or get very sick while in another country. That’s not fear, that’s pretty reasonable right now.

More on the “fear” end of the spectrum for me is being quarantined at my destination or otherwise stuck with no way to get home. For example being exposed to the virus and having to quarantine or flights being cancelled and me not being able to get home.

I’m more than willing to quarantine when I get home. I work from home, I have a house and grocery delivery, it’s not an issue. But doing that when traveling in a place where I don’t speak the language or know the protocol? That’s another story.

Posted by
2744 posts

No one will let me in with the United States passport

Posted by
739 posts

Other then the obvious restrictions and issues with travel right now my big limitations go a bit beyond that.
My father was my travel partner and he is now to Ill to travel. And obviously I don’t want to bring anything back to him.
Beyond that is the financial issue. The shut down did not do good things to my bank account and said account was not doing well from the costs of taking care of my father. So even if this went away tomorrow I would not be in a position to travel to Europe anytime soon.
As for local travel I was considering that but with the increase in cases and my dad being in the extremely high risk group I think I will just stay home and rebuild my deck.

By the way I don’t get the 10% comment. 10% of the tests are positive and that is the threshold? That isn’t a valid number of any sort. If you only have 10 tests today and 1 is positive you would trigger that but another states tests 3000 and has 299 positives and that state would be considered safe?

Posted by
7049 posts

Douglas, the benchmark (desired) testing positivity rate is 5% or below, based on WHO guidance. Here is an explanation: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/testing-positivity

"If a positivity rate is too high, that may indicate that the state is only testing the sickest patients who seek medical attention, and is not casting a wide enough net to know how much of the virus is spreading within its communities. A low rate of positivity in testing data can be seen as a sign that a state has sufficient testing capacity for the size of their outbreak and is testing enough of its population to make informed decisions about reopening."

Posted by
3067 posts

Other people!
Those who won't wear masks, keep their distance, wash their hands, stay home when sick, or believe in medical science!!!!
There is absolutely no good reason to travel for leisure right now.
Stay home and enjoy your own back yard this year.

Posted by
739 posts

Not sure about where you are but we basically get three types of folks tested around here, Those that go to a medical facility and present as possible COVID due to symptoms. Those that get tested because they are on a list of contacts from someone who tested positive and the third group that goes out of their way for whatever reason to find an “open to all” testing location.

The first two groups are going to naturally show a much higher number of positives then what you will see if you randomly picked people in a give community as they have reason to suspect they are infected. The second group is probably lower or percentage then the first group.

As for the third group even that group is probably made up of a disproportionate number of positives as most people going to get tested have some reason to suspect they are ill.

Now if we randomly wondered through a give area and picked a reasonable sampling of folks in age sex race socio/economic spectrum, home working and out in public and all that Kind of stuff then you would have a number that is useful to tell if a given area has a higher infection rate then another given area.
But the way the tests are be administered in many locations is not going to tell you anything of value based on the numbers that you couldn’t just as easily determine from seeing the policy on who is tested.
It is pretty easy to find out what a five areas policy is and an area that only tests those with a high probability of having the virus can logically be assumed to have few tests preformed for whatever reason. You don’t need to see the percentage of positive results to determine that.

And I still say that in reality with the way testing in being ran in most of the country (the US) comparing the test results is pure mathematical bunk. The tests from one state in no way correlate to those from another. Thus are of no use in determining if a state has a higher infection rate per capita then another state.
This is a good example of playing with numbers to get whatever you want from them. The classic figures don’t lie argument.

For example for a few weeks Detroit was showing a lower percentage of positives then almost anywhere else in the state even though they were having a very large number of illnesses and a large number of deaths per capita compared to other areas of the state. In this case you would logically conclude that it was safer. But what it was, was simple, the city of Detroit opened its doors to general testing. It was very early to allow folks to drive up and get a rest at a drive through, vs much of the rest of the state that was at the time only testing those with reason to suspect they had the virus.
This is exactly the opposite result of what is hoped for. As the percent of positive cases was for a short time (until they opened up more testing for non Detroit residents) Thus using that logic if we restrict travel between cities like some states want to restrict state to state travel, them my city would have been restricted but Detroit would not have.

Like I said at this point we don’t even know what we don’t know yet as this is still early days as far as figuring this mess out. And we seam to get new theories all the time. And oddly enough many of these interpretations tend to fall along the general ideas whoever came up with them.

Posted by
2942 posts

My Hot Wife, who is the voice of reason to balance my impulsiveness. If you have heard "Yer So Bad" by Tom Petty, that's her.

Posted by
344 posts

@BigMike 10.30 pm

I like your humour. Nearly spilt my Canadian whisky..

So, you have a hot wife who also has a voice of reason, lucky bastard.

Stay safe. Respect all mankind. Time is a traveller.
Regards
Ron

Posted by
1576 posts

James E. I didn't know you were so deep into philosophy. Thanks for giving us a crash course in Philosophy 101. I am curious. Did any one get that message?

Posted by
3514 posts

Are we retrying to stop it, bend some sort of curve or minimize deaths?

Well, if we flatten the curve or stop it we will minimize deaths.

We were reducing deaths when the country was on shutdown because we were reducing the number of new infections. We continue to show (for now anyway) a lower death rate than at the peak even though infections are up partly because we have discovered at least minimally effective ways to treat it. While it may be possible to have the 100,000 new cases a day Dr. Fauci predicted and still keep the death counts low, I would be happier if the infection rate was also kept low because the hospitals can easily get overwhelmed when too many of these newly infected get sick enough to need hospitals. If they never get sick to start, then that would be better. Why have all those people suffering if it is not necessary?