Home / news / Up to 10 per cent of recovered coronavirus patients in Wuhan study tested positive later

Up to 10 per cent of recovered coronavirus patients in Wuhan study tested positive later

Up to 10 per cent of recovered coronavirus patients in Wuhan study tested positive later

View Reddit by marshthemelloView Source


  1. To again make the point, testing positive for viral nucleic acid after the symptoms of your infection have subsided is not a rare or unique thing, and so far there have been no reported cases of ‘reinfection’ (ie someone getting the disease and becoming unwell a second time). Often there are reservoirs of a virus within the body that have managed to hide from the immune system briefly, and will be cleared at a later point. Some viruses live in your system in that way from infection in childhood until death from old age. It does however remain to be seen whether these patients are still producing enough virus from the respiratory tract to be infectious (likely answer ‘no’)

  2. What is the background false positive rate on these tests? 5% ?

  3. I was under the impression that you always test positive for any virus you get, even if it’s inactive.

  4. > Previous reports have also highlighted cases where patients tested positive after recovery, including one on Sunday from Life Times about a family of three in Wuhan, who all tested positive again.

    >**These incidents have raised questions about whether nucleic acid tests might not be reliable in detecting traces of the virus in some of the recovered patients.**

    >Some experts have also expressed concerns about the sensitivity and stability of the test kits, and the collection and handling of patients’ samples.

    >Wang told CCTV that the five patients from his hospital who tested positive again did not have any symptoms, and none of their family members or people in close contact with them has been infected.

    >He said there was no conclusive evidence to prove that the recovered patients who tested positive again would be infectious to others.

    >“So far there is no evidence to suggest that they are infectious,” Wang said, adding that surveillance of similar patients showed about 80 to 90 per cent of them had no trace of the coronavirus in their blood one month after being discharged from hospitals.

    >Another sample group of 15 patients from the hospital also confirmed a similar trend, with none infecting their family members.

    >“These are just small samples and not enough to assure us of the validity of our initial findings,” Wang said. “We need a large-scale epidemiological study to guide our disease surveillance and prevention works.”

  5. God this virus is such a fuckin asshole.

  6. FYI: South China Morning Post is a state run newspaper. This is why I’m not surprised at the claim that so far there is “no evidence” that reinfected persons can spread the disease. It sounds silly, but I’m sure their defense would be they haven’t specifically recorded one person getting Coronavirus from a recovered patient yet. Besides, this whole article flies in the face of claims Wuhan government made last week that there were zero additional cases of the sickness.

    I’m willing to bet recovery records reflects people removed from hospital for any reason rather than abatement of symptoms, to include moderate cases that had to be sent home to make room for severe cases.

    Just another day in China……

  7. none of the people could be shown to have infected anyone else…sound more likely there are testing errors here than any type of re-infection.

  8. “in other news, 10% of recovered patients in Wuhan were administered antigen tests”

  9. Awaiting the news that the test isn’t reliable….

  10. Doesn’t it stay in your system for 40 days regardless of symptoms?

  11. Not surprised. The doctored video of all the nurses taking off their mask was laughable.

  12. This is known.

    It’s why in the US people who recover are still listed as sick until they get back to back negatives 24hrs apart.

    Some people had to remain in quarantine for up to a month before cleared. No returning symptoms but still tested positive for the virus.

  13. Many people will probably compelled to say “I told you so”, but this is actually a good thing since at least it shows there’s some transparency with publishing results from Chinese tests. Better than trying to paint it all rosy and give false security.

  14. I’m hoping this spells the end of the Chinese Communist party.

  15. Off topic but why did the author title it as 10 per cent and not 10%?

  16. Would the anti bodies your body develops from fighting off the virus the first time be more effective the second time?

  17. There is such a thing as carriers though.

  18. doesn’t your immune system learn to fight it after you’ve had it once?

  19. So “recovered”, not recovered.

  20. Ever since the south China morning post was purchased by alibaba, I assume it’s hardly a credible news source.

  21. At this point are we really believing anything coming from China?

  22. PCR tests like the one for covid 19 are wickedly sensitive. Need to compare a PCR test for another virus to see whether this result is significant

  23. How later is later?

    They were let go and then within 1-2 weeks tested positive again? Or a month later?

  24. Testing positive isn’t a bad thing, in fact it’s probably a good thing. If you can detect the virus but are not contagious it means we can test people to see if they’ve had it and were asymptomatic.

  25. Yeah, this is a sneaky bug.

    Self-isolating may not really work long term. All it takes is that a few people have it dormant in their gut for a while and then have a new flare-up and it’s off again and spreading. Assuming of course, the worst case, that people can be re-infected and can become infectious again.

Leave a Reply