4 ms·
I find it hard to put much stock in studies like these, simply because as stated in the study, the symptom of long COVID observed is "most commonly fatigue (70.
by vouaobrasil 3y ago
I find it hard to put much stock in studies like these, simply because as stated in the study, the symptom of long COVID observed is "most commonly fatigue (70.6%)". How can we be sure that this fatigue is not due to going through a pandemic situation? Well, they do address this later:
"This figure is substantially higher than the prevalence reported from a review of Australian data from earlier in the pandemic which found 5% to 9.7% of persons with SARS-CoV-2 experienced ‘post COVID condition’ at 12 weeks or more after infection."
So that somewhat accounts for it, although NOT completely, because later studies are more closely synchronized with more return-to-work initiatives, which means (A) more people in the office compared to earlier studies, and (B) more people on the roads. The greater contrast between earlier studies and these ones with respect to these environmental conditions could also have accounted for this higher prevalence of long COVID.
(I'm NOT saying that there is NO such thing as long COVID, only that the effect sizes MIGHT be misleading.)
- read_if_gay_ 3y agowhy aren’t we trusting the science anymore?
- vouaobrasil 3y agoTrusting? I trust the scientific method, and part of that is criticism of the results. I pointed out a possible correlate not taking into acount in the paper.
- kossTKR 3y ago90% of "science" these days is actually politics, pill pushing, clickbait, philantrophic PR, geopolitical soft power flexes, grant baiting or the result of industry money or lobbyism. Not weird most people are tired of that shit. The technological foundations are amazing, but were laid many decades ago for the most part and most "bad things" these days are the result of the highly advanced and interconnected but extremely brittle global industrial society we have built, and the inequalities that still exist for 90+ of earths population. But those problems will not get addressed directly but instead used as excuses to implement various shock doctrines by the upper echelons to pull or push various policies to siphon even more money from the many to the few. "Science" as known pop culturally is one of these political tools, and it's becoming apparent.
- postalrat 3y agoTrust comes after skepticism, not before it.
- vibrio 3y agoIt's important to remember that science isn't a bunch of data or experts, it is a way of thinking. That said, many don't trust the scientific system anymore. It seems like a double edged sword. We (collectively) are finding a new set point in the spectrum between "doing our own research" (eg searching inter webs or podcasts for answers), and "blindly trusting the elite experts". On complex technical things, neither one of these extremes seems optimal. The approach I strive for is to try to always question, and to try to know what I don't know even after 'doing my own research'. it's hard and sometimes I have to defer. I think we all do. Who we defer to on a given topic is the crucial point.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- spants 3y agoit was always about money and control. Not science. Science is about debating ideas rather than censoring and flagging comments.
- seydor 3y agofatigue being chronic fatigue in this case. it is well documented and quite extensively reported ( i also know a lot of cases) in 90% of cases there were more than one symptoms reported (six on average)
- vouaobrasil 3y agoYes, and I never said it was nonexistent, a point which I explicitly mentioned at the end of my post. I merely said that the effect size might be enhanced due to return to work initiatives.