A detailed early cohort study conducted by long Covid patients found that over two-thirds of participants produced negative antibody tests, suggesting that even after accounting for false negatives, at least some portion never had Covid-19 to begin with.
Conversation
Replying to
I used to think highly TNR. As a long-time, high-level journalist for Nat Geo & many others, now disabled & largely bedridden by Long Covid, it's so disappointing to see once-respected publication fail so spectacularly at basic research, journalistic rigor, & basic human decency.
1
31
Replying to
“36% of those who had had Covid-19 didn’t have antibodies against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in their blood.”
wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/27
1
18
Replying to
I’m a coauthor of the paper mentioned in here and this is shitty reporting, fact checking, and editing by . 2/3 of people with non-hospitalized cases serorevert within months or don’t seroconvert more if they are female, which is in line with the paper; also, 1/
6
44
228
Replying to
This article is journalistic malpractice and bad science. Shameful.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @nataliesurely and @newrepublic
Let me be as clear as I possibly can — do not write about our condition if you’re not going to include the latest research documenting clear biological abnormalities. There over 10,000 studies documenting clear abnormalities. To dismiss this is an utter failure in reporting. twitter.com/loscharlos/sta…
1
3
42
Replying to
Quote Tweet
5/ There are more than 20,000 peer reviewed scientific articles confirming biological disease - and there are piles of journalistic crap from people like you who insist against all evidence that there's a debate going on. Show us the articles that constitute this debate!
Show this thread
8
