This thread from another virologist casts some doubt about the claims of selective advantage proposed in this preprint: https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1257825352660877313?s=19 Science in action, folks. It's sometimes messy, but usually converges on the truth
Any good takes on the benefit/harm ratio of these pre print servers? Yes, it’s good to get info out quickly, especially in a pandemic. Yes, it’s very important that this kind of science is not stuck behind paywalls. But I really worry about the quality of data being published there and the ability of interested but non-technical readers to understand it in the appropriate context. Many news reports about this article…
The fact that the press can't help sensationalizing things and can't be half-assed to understand that this is not peer-reviewed doesn't change it's utility. I mean ffs, there is a giant banner at the top of the page that says:
"bioRxiv is receiving many new papers on coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. A reminder: these are preliminary reports that have not been peer-reviewed. They should not be regarded as conclusive, guide clinical practice/health-related behavior, or be reported in news media as established information."
Ignoring that is just shitty journalism.