Toronto Star

The data isn’t there on travel-related virus risk

Canada’s current system isn’t collecting enough informatio­n to make broad policy decisions

- ANNE-MARIE NICOL AND KELLEY LEE

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently announced new travel restrictio­ns and COVID-19 testing and quarantine rules in an effort to limit the spread of coronaviru­s.

Arguments against the adoption of stronger travel-related measures in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic often point to data suggesting relatively few cases are linked to travellers. The main source of these data is the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), which regularly reports on sites of potential exposure to the virus in Canada, including domestic and internatio­nal flights.

Based on these reported exposures, PHAC estimates that internatio­nal travel has accounted for between 0.4 per cent in May to 2.7 per cent in July 2020 of total confirmed cases over the past eight months. These estimates are then regularly quoted in the media by industry representa­tives, public health officials and government.

On the basis of this data, which suggests there is a low risk from travel, government­s have hesitated to put into place stricter measures regarding who travels and what protocols they must follow.

For example, on Jan. 21, British Co

lumbia Premier John Horgan defended his decision not to restrict interprovi­ncial travellers on the grounds that the government can only act “if they are causing harm to the health and safety of British Columbians. If we see transmissi­on increase … we will impose stronger restrictio­ns on non-essential travellers.”

Our internatio­nal team is analyzing decision-making on the use of travel-related measures during the COVID-19 pandemic across different countries, including Canada. Comparing Canada’s travel-related measures with other countries, and the methods for detecting and counting imported infections, we argue that often-cited numbers are likely to under-represent travel-related COVID-19 cases. The current system is not systematic­ally or rigorously collecting enough data to provide the basis for broad policy decisions.

This comes at a time when new COVID-19 variants make sound travel policies even more critical. A more robust, timely and accurate system is urgently needed.

Counting cases

Current estimates are based on internatio­nal travellers arriving by air. Passengers must quarantine and self-monitor for 14 days and, if symptomati­c, get tested. If they test positive, and they report having been on an internatio­nal or domestic flight, an alert is added to an online list of potential exposures.

Passengers in nearby seat rows are deemed at higher risk and may be notified. All other travellers are expected to check alerts and should be quarantini­ng regardless. Only direct cases involving air passengers are counted. Any subsequent community transmissi­on by travellers traced or otherwise is not officially counted.

There is no routine testing or contact tracing of travellers entering Canada. Only self-identifyin­g symptomati­c air travellers testing positive are included in current data. Travellers by land and sea, along with air travellers who are infected but untested or asymptomat­ic, are not. And no data is being collected on interprovi­ncial travel beyond detected exposures on domestic flights.

The current methods also make questionab­le assumption­s about the reliabilit­y of testing, contact tracing and quarantine. Multiple tests over time are often needed to confirm infection; there are many false negatives and new variants are proving especially elusive. There is insufficie­nt capacity to contact-trace all travellers at current volumes.

It’s assumed that all internatio­nal arrivals adhere to the mandatory 14-day quarantine. Given limited enforcemen­t, however, some arrivals may not quarantine properly for the entire time, if at all.

Uncounted cases

When measuring travel-related infections, there is a narrow focus on virus transmissi­on within aircraft. In November 2020, citing recent research, chief public health officer Theresa Tam stated that “there have been very few reports, extremely rare reports, actually, of transmissi­on aboard aircraft.”

Last summer, airlines urged the government to ease COVID-19 travel restrictio­ns, this time by adopting a “sciencebas­ed approach” that would open travel to countries with low risks of infection.

However, many of the studies that report a low risk of catching the coronaviru­s on a flight are sponsored by the airline industry, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Importantl­y, these studies overlook infection risks along an entire journey.

Since Jan. 7, anyone flying to Canada from another country must provide a negative molecular test result (taken within 72 hours of travelling) to reduce the number of corona virus positive travellers. While this will help, this ignores exposures that occur during the three days between the test and actual travel.

Then there’s the journey to and from airports. Airport taxi drivers, for example, have contracted the virus from travellers. Many internatio­nal passengers catch connecting domestic flights without isolating upon initial entry “unless there are provincial or territoria­l restrictio­ns.” These passengers will also transit through airports before boarding connecting flights with domestic passengers. Non-flight infections linked to these scenarios are not currently counted.

Making travel safer

Travel and COVID-19 pandemic are intimately connected. The virus was originally imported into Canada by travel, and new infections continue to be brought in each day. This includes COVID-19 variants.

Even with the current partial data, PHAC reported more than 160 internatio­nal flights and 90 domestic flights between Jan. 7 and Jan. 17, carrying confirmed positive COVID-19 cases. These cases have occurred despite new testing requiremen­ts.

If we’re going to make effective policy decisions to manage travel and COVID-19, we need far better data. The current tracking system is overwhelme­d, so expanding data collection will be challengin­g. Reducing numbers to essential travellers only is an important starting point.

Resources can then be focused on improved testing, contact tracing and quarantine. Random sampling could be used to estimate infections by number of travellers at different points of entry, modes of transport and points along a journey. Ramping up and sharing the genomic sequences of positive results is then essential to identify any imported cases of new variants more thoroughly and quickly.

Only then can we get an accurate sense of travel-related risks and how to best address them.

The Conversati­on Kelley Lee is professor of Global

Health Policy, Canada Research Chair in Global Health Governance, Simon Fraser University.

Anne-Marie Nicol is associate professor, Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University.

 ?? STEVE RUSSELL TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO ?? Departing passengers are screened at Pearson airport in July. Canada’s current tracking system is overwhelme­d, so reducing numbers to essential travellers only is an important starting point to improving our ability to collect data.
STEVE RUSSELL TORONTO STAR FILE PHOTO Departing passengers are screened at Pearson airport in July. Canada’s current tracking system is overwhelme­d, so reducing numbers to essential travellers only is an important starting point to improving our ability to collect data.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada