Long COVID remains a mystery, though theories are emerging

Between 10 to 20 percent of people who contract coronavirus are estimated to have long COVID symptoms -- most commonly fatigue, breathlessness and a lack of mental clarity dubbed brain fog -- months after recovering from the disease.

I wonder if they also looked at what percentage of people who did not contract coronavirus had fatigue, breathlessness or brain fog.

Also, was there a relationship between suffering from long Covid and not receiving early treatment?

Anyway, it's interesting that there have been so many articles mentioning long Covid, but none about the vaccine adverse effects.

*I wonder if they also looked at what percentage of people who did not contract coronavirus had fatigue, breathlessness or brain fog.*

How else multiple studies would report an excess of incidence of the problems? Any report that includes a control population is doing exactly that.

Also, was there a relationship between suffering from long Covid and not receiving early treatment?

Since the people that are at a highest risk of developing long covid (because of age, multiple comorbidities, etc.) are also those that have an indication to have early treatment with effecive medication there is an obvious link that would make the correlation positive, those treated early are also more likely to develop long covid (of course without causality).

If "early treatments" refer to the debunked drugs you keep trying to present as treatment for covid (HCQ and ivermectin) the only relationship that could be realistically possible would be a causative one, since the drugs bring no benefit against covid itself there is no mechanism that could lead to them producing a benefit to long covid either, their known toxicities on the other hand could produce iatrogenic conditions that could increase the risk of long covid.

Anyway, it's interesting that there have been so many articles mentioning long Covid, but none about the vaccine adverse effects.

Long covid is an ongoing public health problem of very high importance because of its frequency and the way it affects their victims, vaccine adverse effects in comparison are mild or terribly infrequent according to data obtained from vaccinated people in every country, that now amount to billions. It should be obvious why a huge public health problem (that affected over 100 million people) is given such importance while something representing only a tiny minuscule risk is not.

I came down with extreme fatigue and body aches starting the day after my fourth covid shot, back in April. Been that way since. Might be a coincidence, I don't know. Have tested for covid, and had all kinds of tests, but they can't find any reason for the symptoms.

I read that the new Omicron shot can sometimes help with symptoms of long covid, so I went and got a shot, but so far, no improvement.

But........four people on just our block died from Covid. I would rather have long covid than die from it.

Are they suffering in silence ïf we see so much press on this and also see so many national health bodies looking into it?

"only a tiny minuscule risk"...how do we know?

Or perhaps we're seeing so much press on this and so many national health bodies looking into it because they are looking for excuses to promote the vaccines.

＠1glenn

So your 4th shot gave you some long lasting adverse effects, and you tried to fix it with a 5th shot?!!!

You might want to have a look at the FLCCC. Early on, they came up with a number of Covid prevention and treatment protocols. More recently, they've been looking at treatments for vaccine injury.

https://odysee.com/$/embed/FLCCC-I-RECOVER-Post-Vaccine-Syndrome-Protocol-promo/c71ad2b16b4a899403e678db39658fde7e53eab6?r=BkjnKWKUaBMwqzvheB3m2ueJ4ceNRm1g

only a tiny minuscule risk"...how do we know?

Because scientists of every country have the evidence to prove it, this is not some kind of thing impossible to evaluate without impossibly expensive buildings full of machinery, epidemiologists can collect data from vaccinated people and compare it with unvaccinated people and see if there is any significative risk, there is not, much less in the degree covid brings.

Or perhaps we're seeing so much press on this and so many national health bodies looking into it because they are looking for excuses to promote the vaccines.

There is no need to go searching for excuses to explain how a huge public health problem is recognized as such in the media, that would be only necessary if the professionals in the field disagreed with what is being reported, that is obviously not the case when the news are actually repeating what the experts are saying.

So your 4th shot gave you some long lasting adverse effects, and you tried to fix it with a 5th shot?!!!

You are baselessly assuming the vaccine is responsible for the problem of a patient, for this you would need actual evidence that vaccines are causing it in a significant portion of the people, an excess of incidence not related to covid. This is specially invalid when you yourself began asking if the problems after covid were compared with the incidence in uninfected people, how it is that now you are assuming the vaccine is the cause without first having a comparison with unvaccinated people that shows this supposed excess?

This is called having double standards and evidence a very strong bias that leads to wrong conclusions.

You might want to have a look at the FLCCC

Better not, a source that have been demonstrated biased, wrong and that repeats false information as the FLCCC is not something to recommend to others except as an example of pseudoscience.

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/back-away-americas-frontline-doctors

https://twitter.com/nickmmark/status/1532007285827899392?lang=en

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/frontiers-removes-controversial-ivermectin-paper-pre-publication-68505

"scientists of every country have the evidence to prove it" How much of the data has been suppressed or dismissed as having an unsure correlation? You don't know...and neither do I. I do know several people who have had serious adverse effects including my son who has had nerve damage since his 2nd shot. No scientist saw him, only a doctor who said there's nothing that can be done.

"only a tiny minuscule risk"...how do we know?

Yeah, it initially appeared that way when much of the data remained hidden or ignored. But we now know it is far from minuscule.

Better not, a source that have been demonstrated biased, wrong and that repeats false information as the FLCCC is not something to recommend to others except as an example of pseudoscience.

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/back-away-americas-frontline-doctors

I already explained to you a number of times that America’s Frontline Doctors is not the same as the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Why do you continue to use that reference?

@Geeter

I'm very sorry about your son. I hope he'll recover.

Although it hasn't affected me or my family directly, I feel great anger from the countless vaccine adverse effects as well as from the unnecessary effects from untreated Covid. I can't imagine how you must be feeling.

How much of the data has been suppressed or dismissed as having an unsure correlation? 

So, when the full scientific and medical consensus of the world say the data is clear and there is no realistic possibility the vaccines are not safe and effective, your counter argument is that maybe the scientific and medical communities of the world have no idea of how to do their jobs and so since your beliefs may be supported by information that nobody has but you are sure it must exist (because else you would be wrong)?

That is not an argument, is an excuse. Doctors in every country of the world recommend the vaccines, not a single recognized institution of medicine, public health, etc. says the minuscule risks associated with the vaccines are in any way comparable with the much greater risks coming from not being vaccinated.

Believing in a conspiracy that would require the cooperation of all the medical community of the world, and that would mean they are recommending supposedly dangerous vaccines so they can be used on themselves, their families and friends simply makes no sense.

Yeah, it initially appeared that way when much of the data remained hidden or ignored. But we now know it is far from minuscule.

Data coming from billions of vaccinated people still say the same, in comparison with the risks coming from not being vaccinated and risking the infection the risks from vaccines are a minuscule fraction. For everybody for whom the vaccines are indicated they reduce the risk to their health and life.

I already explained to you a number of times that America’s Frontline Doctors is not the same as the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Why do you continue to use that reference?

The FLCCC, the AFLDS and the BIRD are in practical terms the same kind of pseudoscientific institutions pushing for false information about covid, it treatments and vaccination.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fringe-doctors-groups-promote-ivermectin-for-covid-despite-a-lack-of-evidence/

It is also very telling that you have no counter-argument for the other references that clearly show how the FLCCC shamelessly repeat false information that have been confirmed to put in risk the lives of people and that tries to publish invalid reports where they push for conclusions not supported by the evidence.

Although it hasn't affected me or my family directly, I feel great anger from the countless vaccine adverse effects as well as from the unnecessary effects from untreated Covid.

You only complain about lack of use of treatments already confirmed to be useless against covid, and the vaccine adverse effects are still a tiny fraction of what comes from not being vaccinated, unless you can offer a better option feeling "anger" for the least risky option available makes no sense. At this point the only two options are getting vaccinated and have a very minor risk of problems, or remain unvaccinated and have a much greater risk instead.

So your 4th shot gave you some long lasting adverse effects, and you tried to fix it with a 5th shot?!!!

5 shots????

Within what period?

12 months? 15 months?

But anyway...5 shots...that is crazy!

Sounds like they made up the diagnosis before they knew what the symptoms are

Nothing in the text you quoted gives that impression, not all diseases and syndromes have fixed constant symptoms that are clear and present in every patient. As long as health problems can be identified in the patients with an excess of incidence compared with the uninfected population that means there is value in identifying those problems for treatment.

Sounds like they made up the diagnosis before they knew what the symptoms are

Which specific parts of the text made it sound like that?

Long COVID is essentially the lingering symptoms after recovering from COVID which could include anything, totally up to the individual. I wonder if there is ever any research into correlation vs causation, as I don't imagine any doctor saying this particular symptom wasn't caused by COVID. Just a bunch of data that no causation can be determined, such a mystery.

I wonder if there is ever any research into correlation vs causation

Being an infectious disease there is no difficulty on distinguishing corrleation vs causation for long covid, if the problem is correlated with infection that means it is caused by the pathogen. There is no other available explanation for the increase of risk of long covid in infected people. What you may be confused is about the research needed to clarify the mechanisms that originate the problems, but all three current explanations (immune disfunction, clotting problems and persisten infection) are all caused by the virus.