{"id":232977,"date":"2023-04-10T12:00:23","date_gmt":"2023-04-10T11:00:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=232977"},"modified":"2023-04-10T06:28:59","modified_gmt":"2023-04-10T05:28:59","slug":"long-covid-the-truth-at-long-last","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2023\/04\/long-covid-the-truth-at-long-last\/","title":{"rendered":"\u201cLong Covid\u201d: The Truth at Long Last"},"content":{"rendered":"

A new Norwegian study exposes propagandists on both sides of the debate.<\/em><\/strong><\/h3>\n
\"\"<\/a>

People affected by post-acute or long covid (July 2020)<\/p><\/div>\n

5 Apr 2023 – <\/em>Already in the summer of 2020, after the first covid wave, it became obvious that some people recovered poorly from a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Typical symptoms included<\/a> prolonged lack or alteration of taste or smell; breathing problems, chest pain, and asthma-like conditions; and post-viral fatigue, memory problems, or rapid exhaustion. Such symptoms affected even some young and previously healthy people who had experienced only mild acute covid without hospitalization.<\/p>\n

Ever since, many journalists and activists have exaggerated and sensationalized the issue, many health authorities have tried to use \u201clong covid\u201d as justification for further restrictions, while many skeptics, in response, have claimed \u201clong covid\u201d was just a hoax and didn\u2019t exist at all.<\/p>\n

But a new Norwegian \u201clong covid\u201d study<\/a> once again exposes amateurs and propagandists on both sides of this debate. The study examined young people aged 12 to 25 with and without covid infection (about 400 and 100 people, respectively), at baseline (10 days after infection) and after six months, during the spring of 2021 (when the alpha variant was dominant).<\/p>\n

To determine cases of \u201clong covid\u201d, the study relied on the WHO definition of \u201cpost covid\u201d, which includes dozens of rather non-specific symptoms and assigns a \u201clong covid\u201d diagnosis to anyone who experiences any symptom for more than three months. In the past, this definition was great to produce scary headlines such as \u201c50% of covid patients suffer from long covid\u201d. But as soon as a study added a covid-negative control group, the percentage of \u201clong covid patients\u201d was about the same in both groups and \u201clong covid\u201d looked like an imaginary or psychological condition.<\/p>\n

At first glance, this is what the new Norwegian study found<\/a> as well: about 50% of young people in both the covid group and the control group met the WHO \u201cpost covid\u201d condition, and covid itself wasn\u2019t even a risk factor for developing \u201clong covid\u201d.<\/p>\n

Skeptics everywhere rejoiced<\/a> as another hoax had seemingly been busted<\/a>. Even some serious medical analysts jumped to<\/a> this conclusion. Yet the authors of the Norwegian study merely \u2013 and correctly \u2013 concluded that the WHO case definition of \u201clong covid\u201d wasn\u2019t useful.<\/p>\n

Instead, supplementary table 12, hidden in the annex of the study, reveals the truth about actual \u201clong covid\u201d in young people (see table below). Unsurprisingly, all the clinically well-established \u201clong covid\u201d conditions show up even after six months (unadjusted percentages):<\/p>\n

Altered smell (26% in covid group vs. 0% in control group), altered taste (18% vs. 0%), shortness of breath (20% vs. 12%), chest pain (12% vs. 5%), heart palpitations (14% vs. 7%), memory problems (36% vs. 29%), \u201cbrain fog\u201d or problems making decisions (33% vs. 23%), extraordinary fatigue after physical activity (26% vs. 11%), \u201cempty batteries after light activities\u201d (26% vs. 18%), lack of muscle strength even after resting (21% vs. 12%), and a few more.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Even though this was a rather small study (about 500 people in total), many of these conditions reached statistical significance or almost did so. Thus, even in young people, 10% or even 20% do experience real \u201clong covid\u201d in some form and to some degree. The Norwegian figures indicate that the condition does improve over time, though not as much or as fast as one would hope. Thus, for young people and for public health in general, \u201clong covid\u201d unfortunately is a real issue.<\/p>\n

While covid vaccinations reduced<\/a> the risk of severe covid and health sequelae after severe covid (including strokes and heart attacks), there is no evidence that vaccination reduced the risk of mild covid and \u201clong covid\u201d. Rather, covid vaccination exposed young and healthy people to additional health risks<\/a> such as heart inflammation (mRNA) and thrombosis (AstraZeneca).<\/p>\n

The bigger takeaway is that not just covid propagandists, but also many or indeed most covid skeptics largely misunderstood the coronavirus pandemic. Quite a few covid skeptics seem to believe viruses don\u2019t exist, or SARS-CoV-2 doesn\u2019t exist, or SARS-CoV-2 isn\u2019t a new virus, or they just \u201crebranded the flu\u201d. Many other skeptics seem to believe SARS-CoV-2 didn\u2019t cause excess mortality (about 20 million globally<\/a>), or the omicron variant doesn\u2019t cause excess mortality, or covid vaccines were just a placebo or had negative effectiveness. All of these positions were misguided<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The even bigger takeaway is that on many complex topics, the two dominant positions may well be wrong, and a factual position may not just lie \u201cin the middle\u201d, but somewhere else entirely. The SARS-CoV-2 origin question may be one such case: for three years, proponents of a \u201cnatural origin\u201d and of \u201cmade in China\u201d have been quarreling, but both hypotheses are very likely false<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Related<\/strong>: Post-Acute Covid and Long Covid<\/a> (SPR, August 2020)<\/p>\n

Table: Long covid symptoms<\/h4>\n

Long covid symptoms after six months in people aged 12 to 25.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>
Long Covid symptoms after six months (Selvakumar 2023<\/a>, Table S12)<\/strong><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

See also<\/h4>\n