8 fully vaccinated Yankees test positive for COVID

[drcoastline]

Yankees say 8 fully vaccinated members tested positive for COVID

The New York Yankees on Thursday said an eighth fully vaccinated member of the team has tested positive for COVID-19. MLB and the New York State Department of Health are assisting the team with the outbreak, the team said in a statement.

The team said Thursday that shortstop Gleyber Torres, who is fully vaccinated, tested positive for the virus and was placed on the COVID-19 injured list. They said he previously contracted the virus during the offseason.

Three coaches — Matt Blake, Phil Nevin, and Reggie Willits — have also tested positive, along with four members of the team's traveling staff. "All of the positives are breakthrough positives, occurring with individuals who were fully vaccinated," the statement said.

Six of the staff members and coaches who tested positive are asymptomatic and are quarantining in Tampa, Manager Aaron Boone said Wednesday.

"We're also learning as we go and getting informed as to what we need to do exactly and just try to do as best we can to be able to make quick adjustments on the fly," Boone said in a news conference. "Just doing the best we can with it all."

The Yankees were previously operating under relaxed MLB protocols after successfully reaching an 85% vaccination rate among players, coaches and support staff.

At a White House press briefing Thursday, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky called the positive cases among the Yankees a possible instance of new variants but said that the cases don't negate how effective the vaccine is in large populations.

"My understanding is that six of the seven infections were asymptomatic infections and we look to more data from that report to understand what happened there," Walensky said. "All real-world data in large studies in settings demonstrate that vaccines are effective against disease"

[cabmandone]

FWIW being vaccinated doesn't mean you can't get the virus. The vaccines are supposed to be 90-95% effective at preventing infection. The more important thing to me is whether it prevents a person from getting a severe case that would send them to the hospital for care.

[Aurel]

Could it be that the PCR test detects the RNA that is in the vaccine? I sure hope there’s a study somewhere that tested this possibility...

[drcoastline]

Originally Posted by cabmando

FWIW being vaccinated doesn't mean you can't get the virus. The vaccines are supposed to be 90-95% effective at preventing infection. The more important thing to me is whether it prevents a person from getting a severe case that would send them to the hospital for care.

I get it, just like the flu just because you get the shot doesn't mean you don't get the flu, it would be a different strain.

So isn't this whole exercise of herd immunity and all will go back to normal futile? We see multiple strains already popping up. So they are concentrating on one strain. Can't a new strain do the exact same thing and we start all over again?

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by Aurel

Could it be that the PCR test detects the RNA that is in the vaccine? I sure hope there’s a study somewhere that tested this possibility...

No.

But you could test positive if they're using a rapid antibody test.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by drcoastline

I get it, just like the flu just because you get the shot doesn't mean you don't get the flu, it would be a different strain.

So isn't this whole exercise of herd immunity and all will go back to normal futile? We see multiple strains already popping up. So they are concentrating on one strain. Can't a new strain do the exact same thing and we start all over again?

Kind of why it's important that we get people vaccinated. The more the virus spreads, the more it mutates.

[ZOO]

I hate the Yankees, but I don't take any joy from this news.

#GoJaysGo

[onewhippedpuppy]

This will never end until we quit testing people who aren’t sick.

[cabmandone]

I wonder how they determined if they are cases of new variants? It would also seem that when a breakthrough case is identified that there would be additional testing to make sure that the test isn't picking up the remnants of an earlier infection. It seems to me that more information is needed.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by Aurel

Could it be that the PCR test detects the RNA that is in the vaccine? I sure hope there’s a study somewhere that tested this possibility...

No.

But the real issue with the PCR test is the over sensitive nature. The vaccine does not prevent you from being exposed. But it trains your body to deal with the virus quickly and efficiently. You never develop enough virus to be a transmitter.

BUT BUT BUT, the PCR test at 40 cycles is multiplying the amount of virus RNA by a Trillion. (2 to the 40th power). It can pickup the tiny amount of virus in a vaccinated person who is exposed.

For people who have been vaccinated, the Antigen test is a much better choice. It only goes positive if you have a full infection.

These are "cases" where using the PCR test is not appropriate.

As an another alternative, the PCR test can be used, but you need to supply the cycle data. Someone who tests positive at cycle 20 has 1 million times as much virus as someone who tests positive at cycle 40.

[1990C4S]

Variants are identified by genome sequencing. Some countries (UK) have gone full out in testing for variants. The US has not done nearly as much testing.

To be identified as actual variant cases, they would need to be properly sequenced. But reading the story, the variant 'theory' is a suggestion or guess.

[1990C4S]

Originally Posted by red-beard

As an another alternative, the PCR test can be used, but you need to supply the cycle data. Someone who tests positive at cycle 20 has 1 million times as much virus as someone who tests positive at cycle 40.

Where I live positive tests in cycle 38 or less are positive, 39 is 'indeterminate', 40 is negative.

But there are a lot of variables, and the 'cycle number' is not considered to be a measure of your true viral load. That's why the number is not given out with the results.

If I were fully vaccinated (three weeks past the date of my second dose) and I tested positive, asymptotically, at roughly 35 cycles or greater, I would consider that high number an indication I should not be too concerned.

[red-beard]

Back last August, the CDC stopped requiring 2 negative tests PCR tests to verify you no longer have COVID-19. Why? PCR test is overly sensitive.

The new criteria was 10 days from positive test with no symptoms at 10 days or 10 days after last significant symptoms. This is the point where you are definitely not infectious.

If you are traveling internationally, you need a negative test to get back in the USA. EXCEPT, if you tested positive in the previous 90 days and have a note from a doctor that you no longer have symptoms. Why? Because even though you meet the CDC guidelines for no longer being infectious, you could still test positive with a PCR test.

Again, this is all from an overly sensitive PCR test program.

[red-beard]

Originally Posted by 1990C4S

Where I live positive tests in cycle 38 or less are positive, 39 is 'indeterminate', 40 is negative.

But there are a lot of variables, and the 'cycle number' is not considered to be a measure of your true viral load. That's why the number is not given out with the results.

If I were fully vaccinated (three weeks past the date of my second dose) and I tested positive, asymptotically, at roughly 35 cycles or greater, I would consider that high number an indication I should not be too concerned.

At 35 cycles, whether you are vaccinated or not, you should not be concerned.

[1990C4S]

I can't agree with that statement. At some point early on, your viral load is very small. One test of 35 for a non-vaccinated person could be very serious. Or it could be nothing.

[red-beard]

https://swprs.org/the-trouble-with-pcr-tests/#:~:text=A%20PCR%20test%20is%20amplifying%20sample s%20through%20repetitive,European%20labs%20work%20 with%2030%20to%2040%20cycles.

The issues with PCR tests are numerous:

1. There can be large-scale test kit contamination, as both the US and the UK (and several African countries) discovered during the early phase of the pandemic.

2. There can be testing site or lab contamination, which has led to countless false positive results, school closures, nursing home quarantines, canceled sports events, and more.

3. The PCR test can react to other coronaviruses. According to lab examinations, this happens in about 1% to 3% of cases if only one target gene is tested, as is the case in many (but not all) labs and as the WHO itself has recommended to avoid ambiguous positive/negative test results.

4. The PCR test can detect non-infectious virus fragments weeks after an active infection, or from an infection of a contact person, as the US CDC confirmed.

5. The PCR test can detect viable virus in quantities too small to be infectious

A PCR test is amplifying samples through repetitive cycles. The lower the virus concentration in the sample, the more cycles are needed to achieve a positive result. Many US labs work with 35 to 45 cycles, while many European labs work with 30 to 40 cycles.

The research group of French professor Didier Raoult has recently shown that at a cycle threshold (ct) of 25, about 70% of samples remained positive in cell culture (i.e. were infectious); at a ct of 30, 20% of samples remained positive; at a ct of 35, 3% of samples remained positive; and at a ct above 35, no sample remained positive (infectious) in cell culture (see diagram).

This means that if a person gets a “positive” PCR test result at a cycle threshold of 35 or higher (as applied in most US labs and many European labs), the chance that the person is infectious is less than 3%.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by red-beard

..........The vaccine does not prevent you from being exposed. But it trains your body to deal with the virus quickly and efficiently. You never develop enough virus to be a transmitter.

Good to know, thanks.

First of the season for me Cars & Coffee this Saturday morning, going to wear a mask, and I've been vaccinated.

Interview with new client 2-days ago (indoors), I wore a mask, they didn't.

No chance taking until the smoke has cleared on these issues. Better safe than sorry.

[cabmandone]

Originally Posted by red-beard

At 35 cycles, whether you are vaccinated or not, you should not be concerned.

That's not "necessarily" true. You could test at 35 cycles and be in the beginning or end stages of having the virus. A follow up test is needed to verify which stage you're in from what I've read.

[CurtEgerer]

As a lackadaisical pandemic observer, I do find the difference in panic-levels among people interesting. I live in FL but usually listen to a MI radio station from my former home town At least 50% of the commercials are Covid-related and government sponsored. The news breaks always lead with the latest positive test stats. Even the DJs 'do their part' and remind their hapless listeners to wear their masks and STAY SAFE Every once in a while they'll excitedly announce that something has been "allowed" to partially open, but for god's sake BE CAREFUL if you dare venture out!

Here in FL? It's like 2 different worlds. Rarely, do I hear anything about Covid. Everything's been pretty much open since last summer. I haven't worn a mask since July when I was visiting in MI and was forced to. I've been to INDOOR concerts, restaurants, races, grocery stores, pharmacies, government buildings, banks, etc. with very few, if any, wearing a mask and never have I been asked to wear one (for some reason, almost everyone wears a mask in Walmart though. Even in the parking lot and inside their cars? Maybe they don't want to be seen ). We frequently have indoor get-togethers at numerous friend's homes. We shake hands when we meet. I know of probably 3 dozen over 60 in our community who have gotten Covid. 95% had very mild flu symptoms. One was hospitalized for a day and was feeling crappy for 2 weeks. Now he's fine. We're going kayaking tomorrow. One guy died - he was 85, but had chronic respiratory illness for many years and was on oxygen.

Just seems like those who are bombarded by (or bombarding themselves with) Covid info 24/7 for months on end are naturally going to be in various states of panic. 99.9% of the US population has survived the pandemic. Relax, take a step back. There is normal life out there folks.

[Guzzle]

Can't you still get COVID when you're vaccinated but you don't show symptoms? Maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works, but that doesn't seem all too surprising if that's the case.