How many times in your life are you informed of that?
When does it matter to know? Blood transfusions?
Vinny
Coronavirus and bloodtype
Moderator: Global Moderator
-
vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9482
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus and bloodtype
When does it matter to know? Blood transfusions?
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Re: Coronavirus and bloodtype
I'm know mine. Have given blood.
-
Mark Leavy
- Executive Member
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:20 pm
- Location: US Citizen, Permanent Traveler
-
dualstow
- Executive Member
- Posts: 14298
- Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
- Location: synagogue of Satan
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus and bloodtype
I don’t know, but I asked the first time I had bloodwork done, and I’m pretty sure i donated before I started traveling to Asia and they started rejecting me.
Re: Coronavirus and bloodtype
i'm type A.
As Tortoise pointed out, the theoretical added risk of this blood type pales in comparison to the major risk factor.
It's an interesting association, though the papers have yet to undergo stringent peer review - and the first one came out of China which makes it instantly suspect.
I doubt there's anything specific about blood type though. More likely it is a proxy for something else, e.g. an HLA gene that happens to be located close to the marker for the A antigen.
Also, there's a hidden multiple comparisons effect going on here: run X tests trying to associate COVID infection with some clinical factor, each of which has a 5% chance of coming up with a false positive result - that's the usual p value cutoff used. Most of these don't show a positive result but then you find one and publish it. The chance of this being a false positive result is therefore not 5%, it's related to the actual number of tests you ran 1 - (1-0.05)^X. If X=10, the chances of a false positive are 40%. Since the paper doesn't mention the 9 tests that didn't show anything, the readers are misled.
Here's a cartoon used to illustrate the problem:
As Tortoise pointed out, the theoretical added risk of this blood type pales in comparison to the major risk factor.
It's an interesting association, though the papers have yet to undergo stringent peer review - and the first one came out of China which makes it instantly suspect.
I doubt there's anything specific about blood type though. More likely it is a proxy for something else, e.g. an HLA gene that happens to be located close to the marker for the A antigen.
Also, there's a hidden multiple comparisons effect going on here: run X tests trying to associate COVID infection with some clinical factor, each of which has a 5% chance of coming up with a false positive result - that's the usual p value cutoff used. Most of these don't show a positive result but then you find one and publish it. The chance of this being a false positive result is therefore not 5%, it's related to the actual number of tests you ran 1 - (1-0.05)^X. If X=10, the chances of a false positive are 40%. Since the paper doesn't mention the 9 tests that didn't show anything, the readers are misled.
Here's a cartoon used to illustrate the problem:
- significant.png (289.09 KiB) Viewed 3744 times
-
vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9482
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Coronavirus and bloodtype
Never.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."