4 ms·
There's a lot of research looking into this. Go search on pubmed. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639608/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639608/ There's
by thenerdhead 4y ago
There's a lot of research looking into this. Go search on pubmed.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639608/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36639608/
There's also a large RECOVER initiative to better understand it.
https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2023/03/02/recover-what-clinical-research-comes-next-for-helping-people-with-long-covid/ https://directorsblog.nih.gov/2023/03/02/recover-what-clinic...
- CamperBob2 4y ago"Go search on pubmed" isn't the argument-winning strategy it used to be. They will sanction any sort of quackery that anyone comes up with. Not saying you're wrong or that I disagree, just that PubMed citations aren't a useful way to prove anything.
- thenerdhead 4y agoYour bias is showing in this comment. I was just trying to be helpful. I have no agenda here. There’s plenty of articles indexed on pubmed about long Covid and GI issues.
- lamontcg 4y ago> They will sanction any sort of quackery... pubmed doesn't 'sanction' anything. it just a database of published articles.
- CamperBob2 4y agoBy including an article in their database and linking to it from a .gov website, they most certainly are giving it a stamp of approval in the eyes of the public. Sure, that's like saying that Google approves of a given page just because they pull it up in response to a search query. But that goes back to my original point: no intelligent person (or true Scotsman) would back up their argument by saying "Go search Google" and leave it at that. A hypothetical https://www.google.gov https://www.google.gov would be held to very different standards than Google is today. I'd like to say the same about PubMed, but can't.