All results... including negative results are meaningful.

The peer review process does not guarantee anything. Rather, such process relies heavily on Claimed Authority... the so-called 97% consensus model.

I prefer to the Royal Society:

Nullius in verba

So far, the antibody data from several independent sources are indicating a much larger infection rate. Stanford is just the most recent, but there are other data sets...

So, if the infection rate is an order or two higher than what you've assumed in your paper, what happens to the claim of misinformation?