Walgreens starting to charge for Travel COVID tests

[SherriZ366]

The test is proctored --it's over the internet.  You log in and then wait for a proctor who guides you through all the steps.  You need a phone or laptop with a camera.  The proctor needs to see certain things (QV code, you doing the steps) then you wait 15 minutes and a proctor comes back on and reads your test.  You get an email with the results.  I printed out 3 copies for each of us. 

 

I pretty much guided/supervised my husband taking the cruise.  It was the least stressful test we've taken.  I did it for a solo cruise in January and both of us did the tests for an April -- back to back.  

[topnole]

4 hours ago, vjmatty said:

Only if 100% of people lie to get the free test. 

You realize I said a lot of people.  How does that equal 100%?   I think we have different definitions of a lot versus everyone.  So again.  My statement remains 100% accurate.  

[billslowsky]

Walgreens always charged.  They were getting reimbursed by either private insurance or the government.  The government support is potentially going away,

 

Walgreens didn't do it "for free".

[OCSC Mike]

58 minutes ago, billslowsky said:

Walgreens always charged.  They were getting reimbursed by either private insurance or the government.  The government support is potentially going away,

 

Walgreens didn't do it "for free".

 

Surely you realize that when people say "free" they mean they didn't pay anything out of pocket at the time of the test.

 

You repeating a point that has been made numerous times doesn't help people dealing with the issue of figuring out where/how to test now.

[smokeybandit]

6 hours ago, mpk said:

 

Could you use video conferencing that most people have already (FaceTime, etc), ior did you have to install their app for the proctored test?

The video conferencing is done through their website. Really the app is just an entry point to pick who is taking the test and to view past results

[mpk]

4 hours ago, SherriZ366 said:

The test is proctored --it's over the internet.  You log in and then wait for a proctor who guides you through all the steps.  You need a phone or laptop with a camera.  The proctor needs to see certain things (QV code, you doing the steps) then you wait 15 minutes and a proctor comes back on and reads your test.  You get an email with the results.  I printed out 3 copies for each of us.

 

Which online proctor did you use?

[vjmatty]

3 hours ago, topnole said:

You realize I said a lot of people.  How does that equal 100%?   I think we have different definitions of a lot versus everyone.  So again.  My statement remains 100% accurate.  

More like we have different definitions of 100%. 

[billslowsky]

2 hours ago, OCSC Mike said:

You repeating a point that has been made numerous times doesn't help people dealing with the issue of figuring out where/how to test now.

Go ahead and point out the number of posts on this thread that say that Walgreens has always charged and that it never was free.

 

I'm pretty sure it's a lower number than the number of posts you have made on this thread, like the one where you said CVS does the tests for free.  Which is also untrue.

[topnole]

56 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

More like we have different definitions of 100%. 

Yeah.  100% means all people.   I said a lot of people.  Not all people.  Zero ambiguity on the difference.    But twist it however you want if it makes you feel better.  Point stands.  A lot of people will lie on the surveys.  

[Gracie115]

14 hours ago, SherriZ366 said:

The test is proctored --it's over the internet.  You log in and then wait for a proctor who guides you through all the steps.  You need a phone or laptop with a camera.  The proctor needs to see certain things (QV code, you doing the steps) then you wait 15 minutes and a proctor comes back on and reads your test.  You get an email with the results.  I printed out 3 copies for each of us. 

 

I pretty much guided/supervised my husband taking the cruise.  It was the least stressful test we've taken.  I did it for a solo cruise in January and both of us did the tests for an April -- back to back.  

 

We did this with EMED tests, so easy to do, cost about $25.00.  Just much easier than booking a test at Walgreen's or CVS and not knowing if you're going to have to pay for it or if your insurance will cover it. We brought tests with us on our last trip so we could test before our flight back to the US, thankfully that's not required anymore.  Will also bring with us on our next trip to Italy because we will have to test before boarding our ship.  Rather not have to search around Pisa looking for a testing site.

[vjmatty]

10 hours ago, topnole said:

Yeah.  100% means all people.   I said a lot of people.  Not all people.  Zero ambiguity on the difference.    But twist it however you want if it makes you feel better.  Point stands.  A lot of people will lie on the surveys.  

My point, admittedly too pithy to be fully clear, is that you can’t claim 100% accuracy when evaluating an imprecise value (i.e. lots, many, sh*t ton, etc.). That’s all. 

Edited July 3, 2022 by vjmatty

[topnole]

49 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

My point, admittedly too pithy to be fully clear, is that you can’t claim 100% accuracy when evaluating an imprecise value (i.e. lots, many, sh*t ton, etc.). That’s all. 

And my point is I could never claim accuracy about how many lie.  Just that my statement of many is 100% accurate.  Who the heck knows how many will lie.  But we all know it will be many.  I never once discussed accuracy so I have no idea what/why you are even arguing what I said.  If CVS or Walgreens will give a free test if you say you had symptoms, but charges of you say no to that and that you are using it for travel, we all know a bunch of people will only check that they have symptoms.  We also know many of those same people will then check no on the Royal health questionnaire.  With 10s thousands boarding every week, we know a lot will do it so many is an accurate term.  

[vjmatty]

47 minutes ago, topnole said:

And my point is I could never claim accuracy about how many lie.  Just that my statement of many is 100% accurate.  Who the heck knows how many will lie.  But we all know it will be many.  I never once discussed accuracy so I have no idea what/why you are even arguing what I said.  If CVS or Walgreens will give a free test if you say you had symptoms, but charges of you say no to that and that you are using it for travel, we all know a bunch of people will only check that they have symptoms.  We also know many of those same people will then check no on the Royal health questionnaire.  With 10s thousands boarding every week, we know a lot will do it so many is an accurate term.  

You consider this “arguing”? Interesting. 

[topnole]

2 minutes ago, vjmatty said:

You consider this “arguing”? Interesting. 

I do. As in the common definition “for or against something.”   Or another common definition of persuading others of your view?   Wasn’t it you that replied to my comment suggesting I was inaccurate and making a case (ie. an argument)as to why?   As in the author argues that X leads to Y.  So yes I stand by my assertion that you are arguing your point.  I also still stand by my point that many will lie on the health surveys.  Anyone is free to “argue” their case otherwise.  
 

If you find the use of the word arguing interesting, I’m not sure what to say.  I used it in a very conventional way.   It doesn’t always mean someone is upset.  Nor does always many mean 100%.  

[vjmatty]

48 minutes ago, topnole said:

I do. As in the common definition “for or against something.”   Or another common definition of persuading others of your view?   Wasn’t it you that replied to my comment suggesting I was inaccurate and making a case (ie. an argument)as to why?   As in the author argues that X leads to Y.  So yes I stand by my assertion that you are arguing your point.  I also still stand by my point that many will lie on the health surveys.  Anyone is free to “argue” their case otherwise.  
 

If you find the use of the word arguing interesting, I’m not sure what to say.  I used it in a very conventional way.   It doesn’t always mean someone is upset.  Nor does always many mean 100%.  

 

Guess I don't consider it arguing to acknowledge that we have different definitions of 100%.  Or that I find it strange to use it when defining non-specific terms.  In any event, sorry if it came across as arguing..... to me arguing is for people who need others to agree with them.  I have no such needs, at least not since retiring from the practice of convincing judges to agree with me ;)

 

[smokeybandit]

2 hours ago, vjmatty said:

My point, admittedly too pithy to be fully clear, is that you can’t claim 100% accuracy when evaluating an imprecise value (i.e. lots, many, sh*t ton, etc.). That’s all. 

The CDC has mastered this technique

[topnole]

1 hour ago, vjmatty said:

 

Guess I don't consider it arguing to acknowledge that we have different definitions of 100%.  Or that I find it strange to use it when defining non-specific terms.  In any event, sorry if it came across as arguing..... to me arguing is for people who need others to agree with them.  I have no such needs, at least not since retiring from the practice of convincing judges to agree with me 😉

 

Arguing isn’t a bad thing.  I didn’t take it as a heated disagreement.  If you were a lawyer practicing in front of a judge at point in time. I’m sure you argued many cases.  Doesn’t mean you were upset at or dislike the judge.  Simply making arguments to support your case.  
 

So  worries.  
 

Now I’ll avoid any jokes regarding lies, ethical behavior, and lawyers.  Way too trite.  

[Itried4498]

On 6/30/2022 at 7:03 AM, davekathy said:

Cruise lines need to do away with the mandatory pre cruise covid testing. 

That’d be a potential death spiral to their business.  Prior to the pandemic, cruise lines revenues were disproportionately from high spending seniors.  But many haven’t returned to cruising because, you know, they’re the most vulnerable to Covid and many still take the disease seriously. 

[SherriZ366]

21 hours ago, smokeybandit said:

The video conferencing is done through their website. Really the app is just an entry point to pick who is taking the test and to view past results

eMed -- offered through RCI website.  Used it for January and April cruises.  

[bucfan2]

23 hours ago, billslowsky said:

Walgreens always charged.  They were getting reimbursed by either private insurance or the government.  The government support is potentially going away,

 

Walgreens didn't do it "for free".

Now we actually have to pay for it prior to going on a personal vacation?  It was better when the gov't printed it...I mean, paid for it.  They're supposed to take care of everything, no?

[davekathy]

2 hours ago, Itried4498 said:

That’d be a potential death spiral to their business.  Prior to the pandemic, cruise lines revenues were disproportionately from high spending seniors.  But many haven’t returned to cruising because, you know, they’re the most vulnerable to Covid and many still take the disease seriously. 

Pre-cruise covid testing needs to stop being mandatory in order to cruise. If someone wants to take the covid test, knock yourselves out. 

Edited July 4, 2022 by davekathy

[not-enough-cruising]

2 hours ago, Itried4498 said:

That’d be a potential death spiral to their business.  Prior to the pandemic, cruise lines revenues were disproportionately from high spending seniors.  But many haven’t returned to cruising because, you know, they’re the most vulnerable to Covid and many still take the disease seriously. 

This was sarcastic, right? 
 

Right???

[Itried4498]

34 minutes ago, not-enough-cruising said:

This was sarcastic, right? 
 

Right???

Believe it or not, the end game of cruise lines is to make money.  There’s no federal mandate requiring vaccinated cruises - they’re doing it because, as they’ve indicated at recent earnings, they’re meeting passenger expectations.  Pre-Covid, the lions share of cruisers were older, well educated and came from households with high discretionary incomes — a demographic that largely supports the mandate.

I live in South OC, CA near the coast, among the wealthiest areas of the country.  A large, noticeable faction of the local population still chooses to wear masks, because again, some people still take Covid seriously, whether you do or not.  Some y’all need to get out of your “zone” in rural Texas and recognize that businesses chase the big money.  And there’s a lot more money to be spent from those living in places like SoCal and NYC than Lubbock.

[vjmatty]

7 hours ago, topnole said:

 

Now I’ll avoid any jokes regarding lies, ethical behavior, and lawyers.  Way too trite.  

It’s ok I probably heard them all in law school. And no I don’t equate arguing with being upset, I equate it with work….which I guess could be upsetting at this stage in my life lol. 

[bucfan2]

30 minutes ago, Itried4498 said:

I live in South OC, CA near the coast, among the wealthiest areas of the country. 

If you’re trying to impress somebody, you’re on the wrong website.