We can all agree this was an abject failure on all accounts. The thing that was the most egregious was the lack of communication on any level. Whether the process was all false positives and they should've played or they were all real positives and they couldn't play, they along with us just need to know what the hell was going on. It seems like no one knew and never even had a chance to know, which is lunacy. You'd think communication would be at the forefront at the top of this when it was the last thing on any sanctioning body's mind.
Maybe I'm missing something glaringly obvious, but directly from the CoB's health order:
"Individuals with symptoms of COVID-19 or who have been informed that they
are presumptively positive for COVID-19 are no longer required to self-isolate if
they receive a negative lab test that confirms they are not infected with COVID19."
If I were Wilcox and saw this, and was told "No, this section doesn't apply to your players, only the previous section does" I would also be rightly pissed.
Additionally, there's a lot of talk of "negative test doesn't mean no Covid". That's technically true... however the missing caveat is that for a PCR test the largest danger is in the *early* stages of Covid. If a player tested positive, then days later tests negative repeatedly, and a PCR test does not detect the virus upon repeated samples, there is little chance they have Covid. Just my two cents.
As pointed out in the DBD thread, another thing that doesn't add up is the 24 positive tests despite 99% vaccination. Realistically, you'd expect maybe two breakthroughs, but 24 is crazy.
The comment that rapid tests have their drawbacks is easy, but basically false. They have drawbacks when used incorrectly. The only "danger" (if that term can be applied to a vaccinated population) is that of missing an asymptomatic infection. There is at most a 48 hour window during which the viral load is small enough to avoid detection with a rapid test. the next day or the following day, and infection that is transmissible will be detected. Any player with two (or lets even give them three) negative tests consecutively will be no more at risk of transmitting as any other Cal student (especially any one who doesn't test daily).
There is no rational basis for the CoB to have instituted such draconian measures.
Not to discriminate necessarily, but a subgroup pf players including Chase Garbers with vaccination strict masking, and distancing should have been able to be cleared for the trip.
Per Cal stats: 8 students are in isolation and yet 24 players didn't play. WTF?? The stats are caddywhompis everywhere one looks on this case!! Oh and no one in quarantine.
Thank you Avi for all of your tweets and posts on this issue, as this article mentions, it has been really difficult to figure out what is happening/what happened. One thing that I am still confused about, and could be the source of frustration within the program, is what happens with a false positive. Both the CoB Public Health Emergency Isolation Order PDF (https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Public_Health/covid19/COB-health-order-n20-11-isolation.pdf) and the Pac-12 Covid-19 PDF (https://xs.pac-12.com/2021-08/Updated%20-%202021-22%20Pac-12%20Covid-19%20Guidelines%20for%20Return%20to%20Sporting%20Activity%20FINAL.pdf) have language that suggests the 10-day isolation is moot if you don't actually have COVID-19 following a positive test ("negative lab test that confirms they are not infected with COVID19" and "Discordant Results" in the two PDFs respectively). As others have pointed out, 24 true positives among vaccinated individuals is nearly impossible, but 24 true and false positives is more possible but would require further testing to determine which were true and which were false. If this really was the "fault of CoB" as has been claimed, this issue could be at the heart of it: If the CoB, in an abundance of caution, did not end the isolation period for those who tested positive but later tested negative (via PCR as per Pac-12 Guidelines) for COVID-19.
I know this is all still conjecture but I appreciate everyone's energy trying to figure out what happened.
With everybody on the team virtually being vaccinated COVID 19 is now equivalent to the flue! But now you still people that want to interfere with other peoples lives and dictate what they do and how they do it with little to no regard for how their mandates will effect the individuals involved (the Cal Players in this case). All as a result of ignorant Karen’s who do not look at all the aspects, objectively weighing all sides of the equation, taking into account the consequences the COVID 19 protocols will have on people (Cal Players). It’s just such a shame that the players and coaches are being subjected to this.
So what exactly is the failure of City of Berkeley that everyone is mad at?
If the players really tested positive, then per Pac12 guidelines they can't travel with the team for the Arizona game, which seems like what happened. If Wilcox thinks some were false positive, how do we prove it was false positive?
son of a gun...so hard to believe 36 positive tests in this cohort...wow. Hope we get a clear answer at some point in any case, just to clear the record. HIPA notwithstanding, it seems they could report aggregate info without naming individuals.
kinda confused...you seem to be saying that all 24 of those held back tested positive, is that right? or is it that one or more tested positive, and the others were in close contact? On that basis, there is a scenario where many more get restricted if a negative test does not clear them, but only contact and time is the measure.
We can all agree this was an abject failure on all accounts. The thing that was the most egregious was the lack of communication on any level. Whether the process was all false positives and they should've played or they were all real positives and they couldn't play, they along with us just need to know what the hell was going on. It seems like no one knew and never even had a chance to know, which is lunacy. You'd think communication would be at the forefront at the top of this when it was the last thing on any sanctioning body's mind.
Avi I appreciate the work you have done uncovering a lot of this however I feel the need to make this abundantly clear:
Continuing to spin this as a failure of the coaching staff and leadership is ridiculous, and impossible to state as actual fact.
This is literally Covid's fault. That is it, that is where it starts and stops.
The players were 99% vaccinated, we live in one of the highest % vaccinated places in the country.
Everything else is pure speculation and I'd argue reckless speculation at that.
BREAKING: Chase Garbers speaks and his take on everything that has gone down: https://twitter.com/ChaseGarbers/status/1457913852578779144
It’s effin Covid19’s fault. Fuck Covid19 and their mamas and their children.
Maybe I'm missing something glaringly obvious, but directly from the CoB's health order:
"Individuals with symptoms of COVID-19 or who have been informed that they
are presumptively positive for COVID-19 are no longer required to self-isolate if
they receive a negative lab test that confirms they are not infected with COVID19."
If I were Wilcox and saw this, and was told "No, this section doesn't apply to your players, only the previous section does" I would also be rightly pissed.
Additionally, there's a lot of talk of "negative test doesn't mean no Covid". That's technically true... however the missing caveat is that for a PCR test the largest danger is in the *early* stages of Covid. If a player tested positive, then days later tests negative repeatedly, and a PCR test does not detect the virus upon repeated samples, there is little chance they have Covid. Just my two cents.
As pointed out in the DBD thread, another thing that doesn't add up is the 24 positive tests despite 99% vaccination. Realistically, you'd expect maybe two breakthroughs, but 24 is crazy.
The comment that rapid tests have their drawbacks is easy, but basically false. They have drawbacks when used incorrectly. The only "danger" (if that term can be applied to a vaccinated population) is that of missing an asymptomatic infection. There is at most a 48 hour window during which the viral load is small enough to avoid detection with a rapid test. the next day or the following day, and infection that is transmissible will be detected. Any player with two (or lets even give them three) negative tests consecutively will be no more at risk of transmitting as any other Cal student (especially any one who doesn't test daily).
There is no rational basis for the CoB to have instituted such draconian measures.
Not to discriminate necessarily, but a subgroup pf players including Chase Garbers with vaccination strict masking, and distancing should have been able to be cleared for the trip.
Wilner still claiming there was a contradiction in policy by Cal/CoB, but no details.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1457808863323852801
Per Cal stats: 8 students are in isolation and yet 24 players didn't play. WTF?? The stats are caddywhompis everywhere one looks on this case!! Oh and no one in quarantine.
Thank you Avi for all of your tweets and posts on this issue, as this article mentions, it has been really difficult to figure out what is happening/what happened. One thing that I am still confused about, and could be the source of frustration within the program, is what happens with a false positive. Both the CoB Public Health Emergency Isolation Order PDF (https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Health_Human_Services/Public_Health/covid19/COB-health-order-n20-11-isolation.pdf) and the Pac-12 Covid-19 PDF (https://xs.pac-12.com/2021-08/Updated%20-%202021-22%20Pac-12%20Covid-19%20Guidelines%20for%20Return%20to%20Sporting%20Activity%20FINAL.pdf) have language that suggests the 10-day isolation is moot if you don't actually have COVID-19 following a positive test ("negative lab test that confirms they are not infected with COVID19" and "Discordant Results" in the two PDFs respectively). As others have pointed out, 24 true positives among vaccinated individuals is nearly impossible, but 24 true and false positives is more possible but would require further testing to determine which were true and which were false. If this really was the "fault of CoB" as has been claimed, this issue could be at the heart of it: If the CoB, in an abundance of caution, did not end the isolation period for those who tested positive but later tested negative (via PCR as per Pac-12 Guidelines) for COVID-19.
I know this is all still conjecture but I appreciate everyone's energy trying to figure out what happened.
With everybody on the team virtually being vaccinated COVID 19 is now equivalent to the flue! But now you still people that want to interfere with other peoples lives and dictate what they do and how they do it with little to no regard for how their mandates will effect the individuals involved (the Cal Players in this case). All as a result of ignorant Karen’s who do not look at all the aspects, objectively weighing all sides of the equation, taking into account the consequences the COVID 19 protocols will have on people (Cal Players). It’s just such a shame that the players and coaches are being subjected to this.
So what exactly is the failure of City of Berkeley that everyone is mad at?
If the players really tested positive, then per Pac12 guidelines they can't travel with the team for the Arizona game, which seems like what happened. If Wilcox thinks some were false positive, how do we prove it was false positive?
son of a gun...so hard to believe 36 positive tests in this cohort...wow. Hope we get a clear answer at some point in any case, just to clear the record. HIPA notwithstanding, it seems they could report aggregate info without naming individuals.
So what I gather and am assuming:
1. 36 people tested positive and couldn’t travel.
2. Even if they later tested negative, they would still have to follow the 7 or 10 day quarantine, which means they couldn’t play against Arizona.
3. It seems that the teams actual vaccination rate is lower than 99%.
4. Wikcox and staff still haven’t recruited or developed a decent backup QB.
kinda confused...you seem to be saying that all 24 of those held back tested positive, is that right? or is it that one or more tested positive, and the others were in close contact? On that basis, there is a scenario where many more get restricted if a negative test does not clear them, but only contact and time is the measure.