Mary Wilson
Well-known member
Lindsey R. Robinson-McCarthy1, Alexander J. Mijalis1, Gabriel T. Filsinger3, Helena de Puig2,4, Nina M. Donghia2, Thomas E. Schaus2, Robert A. Rasmussen2, Raphael Ferreira1,2, Jeantine E. Lunshof2,5,6, George Chao1, Dmitry Ter-Ovanesyan2, Oliver Dodd1,2, Erkin Kuru1,2, Adama M. Sesay2, Joshua Rainbow2,7, Andrew C. Pawlowski1,2, Timothy M. Wannier1, Peng Yin2,3, James J. Collins2,4,8,9,10,11, Donald E. Ingber2,12,13,14, George M. Church1,2,11, Jenny M. Tam1,2,*
Science 15 Jan 2021:
Vol. 371, Issue 6526, pp. 244-245
DOI: 10.1126/science.abf8873
Some positive COVID-19 test results reflect researchers' exposure to non-infectious nucleic acids rather than a true infection.
Universities conduct a large proportion of the community surveillance testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (1). At the same time, they have shifted focus to SARS-CoV-2 research to address critical needs during this pandemic. There are now multiple reports of asymptomatic researchers who worked with or near non-infectious SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids and subsequently tested positive during SARS-CoV-2 surveillance screening (2, 3). Such positive test results and the resulting isolation and quarantine are deleterious to the health of researchers, their research programs, and their close contacts. Universities and labs should take steps to identify and prevent misleading test results among their researchers.
Because health departments cannot distinguish positive test results reflecting exposure to non-infectious nucleic acids from those revealing true active SARS-CoV-2 infections, affected U.S. researchers are removed from the testing pool for 90 days, a period during which true infections could be missed (4). Additional false positives could result when monitoring of wastewater for viral outbreaks detects DNA products that are washed down the drain as non-biohazardous waste (5). As polymerase chain reaction tests, other DNA amplification tests (6, 7), and the recently approved at-home nucleic acid tests (8) become more widespread, these cases will likely become more frequent among researchers.
https://science.sciencemag.org/cont...utm_source=JHubbard&utm_medium=Twitter
Science 15 Jan 2021:
Vol. 371, Issue 6526, pp. 244-245
DOI: 10.1126/science.abf8873
Some positive COVID-19 test results reflect researchers' exposure to non-infectious nucleic acids rather than a true infection.
Universities conduct a large proportion of the community surveillance testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (1). At the same time, they have shifted focus to SARS-CoV-2 research to address critical needs during this pandemic. There are now multiple reports of asymptomatic researchers who worked with or near non-infectious SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids and subsequently tested positive during SARS-CoV-2 surveillance screening (2, 3). Such positive test results and the resulting isolation and quarantine are deleterious to the health of researchers, their research programs, and their close contacts. Universities and labs should take steps to identify and prevent misleading test results among their researchers.
Because health departments cannot distinguish positive test results reflecting exposure to non-infectious nucleic acids from those revealing true active SARS-CoV-2 infections, affected U.S. researchers are removed from the testing pool for 90 days, a period during which true infections could be missed (4). Additional false positives could result when monitoring of wastewater for viral outbreaks detects DNA products that are washed down the drain as non-biohazardous waste (5). As polymerase chain reaction tests, other DNA amplification tests (6, 7), and the recently approved at-home nucleic acid tests (8) become more widespread, these cases will likely become more frequent among researchers.
https://science.sciencemag.org/cont...utm_source=JHubbard&utm_medium=Twitter