4 ms·
We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“. That’s not pro or con anything, it’s just the truth that some are having a hard time
by SV_BubbleTime 5y ago
We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“.
That’s not pro or con anything, it’s just the truth that some are having a hard time admitting.
I’m not sure at what point in the last year “we don’t know” became taboo. Maybe when we wrapped unknowns in policy decisions?
EDIT: yes, we have data for that long Covid symptoms especially in severe cases, and suspected in mild cases, my point was that we do not have enough data to make policy decisions based on this. Currently hard to quantify, as the CDC has anxiety and depression listed as long Covid symptoms.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> We know as much about “long Covid, as we know about “long covid vaccine“ As in we have proof one exists and none of the other?
- SlowRobotAhead 5y agoI’m a little out of loop, but isn’t it true that there can be no possible studies for long covid more than a year and half or so? Of course there is long Covid, and of course there is the possibility of long Covid vaccine regardless of how ridiculous and unlikely that surely is. But from a scientific standpoint, it seems all we have could be initial studies at best.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> all we have could be initial studies at best Correct. But at t+1.5 we have evidence long COVID exists. At t+1 we have zero evidence of long-term vaccine side effects.