This information is good to know but the statement - "despite high vaccine coverage, a high percentage of vaccine breakthrough infections with high viral loads have been detected in this county" - seems misleading. If it simply means that of those who did have breakthrough infections, the viral loads were high, it means one thing. However, if it is read as meaning there is a 'high percentage of vaccine breakthrough', it implies something else entirely. Popular media seizes on this ambiguity in meaning whether unwittingly or purposefully. Such a statement needs to be preceded by the estimate of the percentage of all those fully vaccinated in Wisconsin who are documented to have had a breakthrough infection at all. I realize that is not the focus of the study/article, but including such a statement changes that.