3 ms·

A year later, 45% of Covid patients in Wuhan still have symptoms

• chiefalchemist 5y ago
  > The study does have limitations, though. It does not have a control group, and the researchers were unable to contact everyone who was discharged from the hospital during the studied time period. This could create biases in the data based on those who were able or willing to participate in the follow-up. The study also only looked on early in the pandemic before the emergence of any variants, which could have different long-term effects. Still, the findings are largely in line with other studies. The authors conclude that "taken together, our research suggests that the health consequences of COVID-19 extend far beyond acute infection." Pardon the rant but... So let's take a half-assed effectively invalid scientific study, and use it to justify legit studies? And/or use legit studies to prop up a wonky one? As tempting and convenient as this might be, it's not Science. This type of bias has no place in the context of science. If this were a news outlet, it would be editorial. Editorial should not be confused with real journalism.