5 ms·

I don't know what you expect. This disease is about 8 months old and everyone is still learning a lot. First of all, you're being kind of demanding. Why don't y

I don't know what you expect. This disease is about 8 months old and everyone is still learning a lot. First of all, you're being kind of demanding. Why don't you collect the numbers? The authors, in many cases, are busy on the side treating waves of critically ill covid-19 patients. Also, this is from the journal "Brain". It's not in a epidemiology journal. They are just neurologists describing a possible tie between a new virus and a constellation of neurological symptoms. https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/doi/10.1093/brain/awaa240/5868408 https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/doi/10.1093/brain/awa... They call for further study in their abstract. This is a new discovery and you want population statistics? They want population statistics, too. The NUMBERS don't exist yet, because they published this on THURSDAY.

leereeves 6y ago
Perhaps Reuters should have waited for more information before writing this article. Warning about a "potential wave of Covid-linked brain damage" when it's likely to be a rare complication is not responsible journalism.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- modmans2nd 6y ago
  Why? Because people shouldn’t know about something scientists are investigating or because you think Covid19 is over blown and this is just another thing in the bucket of “it’s not over blown” and you don’t like that?
  - gremlinsinc 6y ago
    Some people have a really bad day if you hurt their bucket of cognizant dissonance. They have an image of the world if you chip at it in any way, it just pisses them off. You can't convince these people. I'd like to say I've given up.... but my facebook feed says differently lol.
    - leereeves 6y ago
      Well, isn't this interesting. On this same thread I'm being downvoted for correcting another comment's outdated quote of the CDC's estimated IFR. I posted the latest (higher) figure from the CDC, which increased the estimated number of people who will die, and some folks didn't like that. And over here modmans is accusing me of thinking Covid19 is over blown, while you accuse me of cognitive dissonance. It seems to me that you simply dislike any suggestion that Covid19 is less serious than you think, while other people dislike any suggestion that Covid19 is more serious than they think. Here's what I think: I think honest, factual discussion of this topic is important, and that includes considering all facets of the evidence. I think describing a rare complication as a "potential wave" is overblown. And I think the level of discussion of this topic, even here on HN, is among the worst I've ever seen.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

leereeves 6y ago

Perhaps Reuters should have waited for more information before writing this article. Warning about a "potential wave of Covid-linked brain damage" when it's likely to be a rare complication is not responsible journalism.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
modmans2nd 6y ago
Why? Because people shouldn’t know about something scientists are investigating or because you think Covid19 is over blown and this is just another thing in the bucket of “it’s not over blown” and you don’t like that?
- gremlinsinc 6y ago
  Some people have a really bad day if you hurt their bucket of cognizant dissonance. They have an image of the world if you chip at it in any way, it just pisses them off. You can't convince these people. I'd like to say I've given up.... but my facebook feed says differently lol.
  - leereeves 6y ago
    Well, isn't this interesting. On this same thread I'm being downvoted for correcting another comment's outdated quote of the CDC's estimated IFR. I posted the latest (higher) figure from the CDC, which increased the estimated number of people who will die, and some folks didn't like that. And over here modmans is accusing me of thinking Covid19 is over blown, while you accuse me of cognitive dissonance. It seems to me that you simply dislike any suggestion that Covid19 is less serious than you think, while other people dislike any suggestion that Covid19 is more serious than they think. Here's what I think: I think honest, factual discussion of this topic is important, and that includes considering all facets of the evidence. I think describing a rare complication as a "potential wave" is overblown. And I think the level of discussion of this topic, even here on HN, is among the worst I've ever seen.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]