I find this immensely frustrating There is actually not really any evidence at all that serology surveys are 'flawed' or 'dramatically underestimate' how many people have had COVID-19 Sighpic.twitter.com/Q8yWz2FHgV
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
So, the evidence that this editorial cites in favor of its argument appears to completely contradict the main point, which is...not great And yet, reported as fact As I said, sigh
More broadly, we know that the antibody tests for COVID-19 are pretty good, and probably don't miss a huge proportion of people who have actually had the disease https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2516 …pic.twitter.com/O5vRLc0yY8
I wrote this up in a rapid response to the article which has now been publishedhttps://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m3364/rapid-responses …
Depends on the reason for the low correlation. For example, if it is because some assays have extremely low specificity (i.e. because of other coronavirus cross-reactivity), then it may not be an issue
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.