I don't think that this study by Basavaraju et al from @CDCgov can be taken as evidence that #COVID19 was circulating in the US in December 2019. 1/10https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1785/6012472 …
-
-
The other angle to consider is that if we're supposed to believe that 2.0% of random blood donors in Dec 2019 are COVID+ this would translate to millions of infections in the population at large, in which case we would have noticed due to people dying in large numbers. 10/10
Show this thread -
Follow up #1: Also, a reminder that we at the
@seattleflustudy PCR tested 3600 samples from individuals with acute respiratory illness collected in January 2020 from Seattle and found zero positives for COVID-19. This is a much more specific assay.https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1249414295042965504 …
Show this thread -
Follow up #2: This doesn't mean that COVID-19 was completely absent from the US in January 2020, just that prevalence at that time was exceptionally low. Finding 0/3600 COVID+ acute respiratory specimens doesn't square with theoretical 2% ELISA positivity in Dec.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Then its unreliable data. That should be the papers conclusion.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.