[magnus]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

[magnus]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

[burger]

This looks less than compelling. 

Study participants took pictures of their results and sent them in along with the survey. Poor image quality and file problems made 136 of the results unverifiable. Those 136 were classified as negative results, according to the study.

The number of players involved in the study is unclear. The authors did not ask a question regarding the player population. The Arizona Diamondbacks returned the most samples, with 362, and four teams did not participate.

Also, even if the 0.7% positive rate adjusted for false positives, it's possible that the real number was 0.  That was one of the big problems with the Santa Clara Co. study.  We'd have to see a full report from MLB to know what's up here.

[burger]

This looks less than compelling. 

Study participants took pictures of their results and sent them in along with the survey. Poor image quality and file problems made 136 of the results unverifiable. Those 136 were classified as negative results, according to the study.

The number of players involved in the study is unclear. The authors did not ask a question regarding the player population. The Arizona Diamondbacks returned the most samples, with 362, and four teams did not participate.

Also, even if the 0.7% positive rate adjusted for false positives, it's possible that the real number was 0.  That was one of the big problems with the Santa Clara Co. study.  We'd have to see a full report from MLB to know what's up here.

[Mick]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

[Mick]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

[Snorlax94]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

Something is amiss, as quoted, the denominator was 60.
“Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study...”

Probably thr reporter screwed it up somewhere. Maybe the symptom frequencies were for all tested, not just those testing positive.

[Snorlax94]

MLB with Stanford had 5000+ employees tested for antibodies. 

Only 60 tested positive. 

I don't have any insight or analysis on this study.  Just thought it apropos for us.  =)

Though, I guess there's one question I had. 

Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study, in the two weeks prior to the test:

• 2.7% had a fever
  
  
• 14% had a headache
  
  
• 8% had a cough (compared to 9% among those who tested negative)
  
  
• 0.9% had lost a sense of taste and smell

If only 60 people were positive,  how can 0.9% of 60 have lost one of their senses?  That's not even a whole person.  Perhaps something lost in translation. 




https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2915...-employees

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

Something is amiss, as quoted, the denominator was 60.
“Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study...”

Probably thr reporter screwed it up somewhere. Maybe the symptom frequencies were for all tested, not just those testing positive.

[magnus]

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

Something is amiss, as quoted, the denominator was 60.
“Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study...”

Probably thr reporter screwed it up somewhere. Maybe the symptom frequencies were for all tested, not just those testing positive.

Yeah, if the 0.9% actually meant all participants, then that's pretty close to the number of people that were positive.  I'd then wonder how many of the positives actually did lose their taste/smell as it the numbers might align and reveal that all did.

[magnus]

Perhaps the 0.9% referred to the denominator of 5,754.

Something is amiss, as quoted, the denominator was 60.
“Among those with COVID antibodies in the MLB study...”

Probably thr reporter screwed it up somewhere. Maybe the symptom frequencies were for all tested, not just those testing positive.

Yeah, if the 0.9% actually meant all participants, then that's pretty close to the number of people that were positive.  I'd then wonder how many of the positives actually did lose their taste/smell as it the numbers might align and reveal that all did.

[fullmetal]

But the thesis still holds, that far fewer of the population may be recovered from SARS-CoV-2 at this time, right?  That's a disheartening thought to see that 80k+ deaths may have only gained us a small fraction of progress toward herd immunity.

[fullmetal]

But the thesis still holds, that far fewer of the population may be recovered from SARS-CoV-2 at this time, right?  That's a disheartening thought to see that 80k+ deaths may have only gained us a small fraction of progress toward herd immunity.