The article states "critics raising issues with the researchers’ recruitment method (Facebook ads), flaws in their statistical methods, and even the tests themselves — manufactured in China, and since banned from export." Ok. How is that statement any better than a flawed study? We are just supposed to take them at their word also? Then they put this gem of a comment "The tests are known to generate false positives up to 1.7 percent of the time. Given that the Stanford study originally identified 1.5 percent of its participants as having the antibody, critics pointed out that in theory, every single one might have been a false positive." Seriously? The likelihood that all of the false positives just happened to be all of the people that tested positive has to be like astronomical.
Regardless if you think the study is substantial or not, idiot statements like the above cast doubt on the intended message and just give way to political fodder.