Actually, folks ought to in all probability truly learn the unique supply from the scientists for these things. Journalists normally play quick and free with science stuff.
The unique submit was on a weblog by Enrico Bucci who’s a prof at Temple College. https://cattiviscienziati.com/2020/09/07/note-of-concern/
They observe considerations concerning a number of issues and wish extra information. Their concern was
obvious information sample repetition for reciprocal titres of RBD IgG and neutralizing antibodies
“Whereas we perceive that on this case the variable underneath examine is discrete (representing the reciprocal of a dilution), nonetheless it appears to us that on the bottom of straightforward probabilistic evaluations the actual fact of observing so many information factors preserved amongst completely different experiments is extremely unlikely.”
“Please observe that, in lack of the unique numerical information, no conclusions might be definitively drawn on the reliability of the info offered, particularly concerning the obvious duplications detected.”
and a couple of)
“The authors didn’t specify sufficient traits of the convalescent sufferers used as a management for the analysis of the humoral response in determine 2. How had been they matched to the completely different teams of enrolled volunteers? Since there are a number of convalescent management sufferers which apparently are seronegative and are additionally unfavourable for neutralizing antibodies, it is usually essential to know when their plasma was collected – for every affected person, what number of days handed since signs and seronegativization occurred?”
The unique paper by was peer reviewed and scrutinized, one of many reviewers was the deputy director at John Hopkins Bloomberg Faculty of Public Well being.
Im not an immunologist so I can not say if the questions are simply tedious questions or extra severe considerations