Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It Seems like a good idea but I worry about the slippery slope effect.

Can they require this for flu? How will they handle false positives? What about something like HIV? What if you need to get home for medical treatment or a family emergency?



> Can they require this for flu?

I think they should. But the flu isn't as virulent as COVID.

> What about something like HIV?

You can't get HIV by someone breathing on you. How many people do you usually share needles with on airplanes?


The slippery slope argument is generally regarded as a logical fallacy because the argument can be applied to anything. You should at least offer an explanation of why believe the slippery slope is a risk in this case. What interest would the U.S. have in requiring Flu or HIV tests for travel? The reasons for requiring a covid test are obvious unless you're a person that believes covid is equivalent to the flu.


> The slippery slope argument is generally regarded as a logical fallacy because the argument can be applied to anything.

Can you expand on this? I've seen the claim several times, but given the fact that (in general, not referring to covid) it is possible to point to historical examples of how things progress from A->B->C, and then you can identify a sequence of A->B currently, it becomes almost silly not to conclude the goal is C. So why is demonstrating history repeating itself a fallacy?

Granted I've placed a number of conditions there. Maybe that's what you mean. I'm just curious what the general argument is.

> What interest would the U.S. have in requiring Flu or HIV tests for travel?

Humans unfortunately have a bias for "doing something" rather than nothing, even if the two actions are equivalent in consequence (which favors doing nothing - less energy).

Scream loud enough and we'll create problems where there weren't any. I mean that's basically what network news does all day every day. Then we'll respond to those problems, and create more problems. Etc. "It worked for covid, why aren't we doing it for the flu?" Even if the argument isn't valid, it sounds good, and politicians like things that sound good even if they don't do anything, creating problems and great expense for people for little to no actual gain.


None of those are really considered pandemics.


HIV/AIDS is definitely frequently considered a pandemic, and at least a global epidemic. In any case the obvious difference is that it isn't as contagious.


Specifically, it's not airborne, which is the only relevant mode of spread in an airplane.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: