The value of incorporating research evidence into clinical practice is in part, to help acknowledge, accept and manage uncertainties. The urgency related to the Covid-19 pandemic has changed usual publication process and information sharing. The rapid knowledge exchange between theory, research and clinical recommendation has occurred with the hope of preventing Covid-19 related mortality and reducing morbidity. However, expediting knowledge transfer should not occur at the expense of accuracy and cautious interpretation of the research evidence. Such carelessness only serves to inundate the public and health professionals with false or misleading information. Such inaccuracies, especially when relating to potential therapeutic strategies for Covid-19 are likely to have severe negative consequence on people's health. There is therefore a need to avoid speculation and favour scientific rigour and intellectual honesty in claims made about evidence on benefits of manual treatment for Covid-19 patients. This letter to the editor questions overstatements found in Marin et al.'s published narrative review and focuses on three avoidable types of errors: misinterpretation, cherry picking and lack of methodological rigour.