Experts are skeptical of the study linking blood to NO-19

Experts are skeptical of the study linking blood to NO-19

Facing a global epidemic, the medical research community has been quick to learn every inch of this new virus responsible for COVID-19.

New media reports on the deadly disease, responsible for more than 500,000 patients worldwide, have begun to spread quickly on social media.

But not all studies are designed to be consistent.

A study by a team of researchers considered that people with blood type A could be infected with UID-19 as a recent example of such studies.

The findings, which were gathered by the mainstream media and were widely reported in social media, examined 2,173 patients who were infected with COVID-19 from three hospitals. ill in Wuhan and Shenzhen, China.

The researchers looked at the distribution of blood in normal populations of all regions, and then compared them to the COVID-19 patients. According to the findings, people with type A blood were “significantly at increased risk for COVID-19 compared with the non-A. group.”

Although the study itself is real, experts warn its findings are preliminary.

Worse, the study was not confirmed by the review, a technique famous for research studies used to test the validity and bias of prior studies. proclaim them.

The study was made public at medRxiv, a website where researchers can publish “completed but not published” medical studies to create debate among professionals.

Dana Devine, senior health and research officer at Canadian Blood Services, told by phone Wednesday.

“I’m a little skeptical.”

Devine, an expert in blood disorders, notes that certain groups associate with certain diseases, such as the potential for malaria in red blood cells.

“The idea that blood antigens might interfere with something is not off the wall,” he noted.

“But this research is especially worth looking at in the larger population with a greater focus than people have done so far.”

Devine notes that blood plays an important role in some medical emergencies. The Canadian Blood Services is also asking Canadians to donate blood to support supplies during a large outbreak across Canada.

“We want Canadians to understand that we have our own lab where we respond to critical care in the hospital. People still need blood,” he added.

“We have put practices away from clinics. We must be careful about disclosing donations at any risk. It is a safe place to go. “


Experts have said there is no question that prior research has played a key role in developing solutions to PID-19 infection, presumably through development. better vaccines or measures.

But the average person should be especially careful when giving weight to these studies, especially before sharing them on social media.

“I want to focus on high-profile places,” Dr. Craig Jenne, a scientist and epidemiologist with the Cumming School of Medicine at the University of Calgary.

“If there is a new drug, a new discovery, or a cure and the World Health Organization (WHO), Public Health Canada, or the CDC (Department of Safety and Prevention) does not. having said about it, I think you have to measure other applications with salt content – or at least an air of skepticism. “

Jenne, who serves on the research board for the two studies, notes that there has been a recent surge in anonymous reviews of websites or websites where researchers can advertise their work directly.

He explained that people with daily audits collect rigorous controls and data from researchers in similar positions to measure both statistics, make sure there are enough controls well in the research, and that the authors have all tested well to make them interpret the results fairly. The.

“Most of the time there are minor issues and it is necessary to go back to the original author to perform further experiments to confirm the results,” he said.

But Jenne says that even if studies that do not have the results of quality tests are “controversial,” it doesn’t mean they’re wrong.

“Just because something has not been reviewed does not mean that it is inaccurate. It means it has not been properly examined,” he said.

“Without proper research, one that goes beyond peer review, it is difficult to say what the researchers or authors actually agree.

I’m not saying they are lying. I think we need to be very careful that unless well-researched you will be a phenomenon that has no impact on the general population. “

Jenne notes that in the event of a sudden outbreak, such as COVID-19, the people with the newspaper reviews have a quick review process that allows them to publish new findings as soon as possible. quickly. However, these studies are still undergoing poor performance by peer review.