Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

g00fyg00ber741 t1_j2zlyb1 wrote

I wonder if this will one day affect the majority of the population. 25% in 3 years is really a significant amount of infected to have long covid. And the virus will continue to infect millions and millions more. There’s no more efforts like masking or isolation time or anything, and many aren’t updated on their vaccines or have never had one.

55

[deleted] t1_j308cn6 wrote

[removed]

17

jeswesky t1_j30l38g wrote

I’m vaccinated and boosted but haven’t worn a mask regularly in about a year. I still have never had Covid despite being exposed to it multiple times. Then I have a friend that is vaccinated, boosted, and masks regularly that ended up in the icu with COVID.

7

g00fyg00ber741 t1_j30gzdi wrote

Yeah, it’s unfortunate that even when vaccinated and boosted and masked, others who aren’t those things can still choose to spread it to us. I got Covid just a few weeks after a booster shot a year ago because my coworkers and the customers rarely masked or didn’t have up to date vaccinations. Just basing that off the reported numbers. It sucks. And now we might have permanent or long term health issues because of other peoples’ carelessness when it comes to infectious disease. I’m just glad I’m not immunocompromised or have some serious physical disability, otherwise I could potentially be a hell of a lot worse

5

TotalWarspammer t1_j30hloy wrote

At least the vaccine you took lessens the seriousness of the infection and reduces risk of hospitilization.

3

g00fyg00ber741 t1_j30hwj1 wrote

Yeah. It’s not enough comfort though considering there’s still a 1 in 5 chance I’ll get long covid and it gets more likely with each reinfection

6

idickbutts t1_j314dcs wrote

You need to accept some responsibility in your life.

0

mindfu t1_j32f6sx wrote

If I understand your comment right, how is the person you're responding to not accepting responsibility?

2

g00fyg00ber741 t1_j32u0e8 wrote

By masking and vaccinating to the best of my ability I guess ¯_(ツ)_/¯

2

mindfu t1_j32xxhm wrote

Thank you, it didn't make any sense to me either :-) I'm here scratching my head

2

fairywizard_lady t1_j30pf28 wrote

Obviously that's not working. So why are we doing any of this?

0

[deleted] t1_j30ys32 wrote

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” - 1984

0

soldiergeneal t1_j30r0nd wrote

Long Covid to best of my knowledge really only lasts a few months. Exceptions outside of that are way less

−6

PennName47 t1_j3284p3 wrote

That doesn’t sound accurate. I’ve seen a lot of studies that have shown persistence several months later, and of course this is ongoing because the disease is still “new”.

5

soldiergeneal t1_j32aeea wrote

>several months later

Yes that's what I am talking about a few months. Maybe you took offense at me using few instead of several? Just did a quick search of long Covid recently and the amount of months it lasts is longer than I last checked a while ago.

For long Covid I am mainly talking about debilitating conditions like brain fog, cognitive decline, severe fatigue, etc. That being said sounds like I need to look at more recent data. I like to look stuff up then not look up for a while, which doesn't work for new stuff as well I guess.

0

Killemojoy t1_j349k69 wrote

But that's not, NOT a big deal. When employers think illness already is a madeup excuse to not work, what happens when you're underperforming for months on end?

2

soldiergeneal t1_j34gu0i wrote

>But that's not, NOT a big deal. When employers think illness already is a madeup excuse to not work, what happens when you're underperforming for months on end?

Doesn't change anything. Companies will get rid of you for bs excuse regardless of illness. They only care about performance and output.

1

sarinGasSmells t1_j2ymqll wrote

Female sex was a significant risk factor.. whew, dodged a bullet on that one

43

zhulinxian t1_j2zy32b wrote

I’m a male dealing with my second round of long covid after a reinfection.

Can Reddit please stop with all of these lame jokes about a serious medical condition that even many doctors aren’t treating with due urgency PLEASE.

13

WatAb0utB0b t1_j3095fn wrote

I think they were just making fun of the poor job OP did titling this. No one here thinks Covid isn’t serious.

24

Aporkalypse_Sow t1_j2z4g8m wrote

Not so fast, they didn't specify humans. You may still need to go have some awkward conversations.

−11

Defyingnoodles t1_j3113bx wrote

The most convincing explanation for long COVID syndrome to me is that the hyper coagulable state seen in COVID patients is causing tiny, subclinical blood clots. In the brain, this leads to widespread tiny strokes essentially, causing the symptoms of brain fog and reduced cognitive functioning. Female sex as a risk factor makes sense in this case, as higher estrogen levels are associated with increased risk of clotting.

13

goosegirl86 t1_j318rby wrote

Also females who could be on contraception. The pill is known to increase risk of blood clotting (perhaps due to the estrogen? I’m unsure of the reason so don’t wanna guess incorrectly)

5

Defyingnoodles t1_j32sjcl wrote

Bingo! Premenopausal women (higher estrogen levels than post menopausal) who are taking hormonal birth control are at much higher risk of clotting events. The study in this post was conducted mainly in Saudi Arabia, where rates of normal birth control usage are much lower than the US. From a quick control F, they didn’t control for birth control. If not controlled for, I imagine the association between female sex and long COVID would be stronger in the US. I don’t think birth control is a confounded though, as women at baseline have higher risk of blood clots.

3

Timirninja t1_j30c5z6 wrote

Women likely to report post-Covid syndrome, study finds

12

PennName47 t1_j328iue wrote

Uh, what? Was this a shot at women, or are you just ignoring the other risk factors for some reason?

2

Timirninja t1_j32918k wrote

That’s my opinion. Summarising the findings. Men are likely to complain less, care about their health less, visit doctors less and simply disregard their degrading physical condition on aging

−2

PennName47 t1_j32bpjp wrote

….all this means is that it’s likely underreported among the male cohort. Not sure why you’re singling it out as women report more. It’s more that men report less. And that’s also just one aspect of the findings. The startling number of people with long COVID in the study is more salient.

5

Timirninja t1_j32cmgr wrote

Glass half full or half empty. Tomato tomato

0

PennName47 t1_j32d839 wrote

No no, I think the distinction is very important. If your hunch is correct, and men are underreporting their symptoms, that means studies like this could be giving the wrong impression and a false sense of security to men. They may take more risks and not seek early treatment that could change the outcome of their long-term health. Just saying “women report more” can obfuscate the more salient point that men might be reporting less but are actually at more risk of long-COVID than they think.

3

Vegan_Honk t1_j30y859 wrote

Well 25% is a pretty big goddamn number. That's definitely gonna be noticeable.

5

Vegan_Honk t1_j30ybjn wrote

Small sample size but still a bit scary.

−1

AutoModerator t1_j2x1zs8 wrote

Vote for Best of r/science 2022!

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

goodty1 t1_j30jyl2 wrote

What’s the different between covid -19 hospitalizations, and initial symptomatic covid -19

1

Defyingnoodles t1_j310g5c wrote

If you were symptomatic when diagnosed with COVID, or if you were hospitalized when you were sick, you have a higher risk of suffering from long COVID syndrome.

3

Sackeynimh t1_j2zb182 wrote

Thank god I’m male and can have all the sex I want with this new found evidence.

−8

Polymorph49 t1_j3190cv wrote

Some people will use this as ammunition to recommend we implement chasing covid-zero. The thing is that while a 25% chance of long covid really sucks, we cannot forever be petrified of this disease and refrain from living our lives because of this risk. The virus isn't going away, it will probably be around in some form for decades. The best we can do it take reasonable steps to prevent infecting large numbers of people, but we must not lose our lives and livelihoods to achieve this.

−8

SciPhiPlants t1_j2ypgw8 wrote

What's the percentage of women vs men using the internet as their "diagnosis"?

−29

DollyPartWithOn t1_j2x3r2k wrote

Great. Another survey study showing the same thing as every other study.

−58

SueSudio t1_j2xbvny wrote

Multiple studies replicate findings. >>"What's the point? We already knew this!"

One study proposes a finding. >>"Sure, but has anyone else been able to confirm this?"

69

DollyPartWithOn t1_j2xd9lv wrote

Soon, the NIH will have its groundbreaking study showing Long Covid affects 23-25% of the population, affects mostly women, and those with symptoms.

−45

Elanapoeia t1_j2y1yhd wrote

If you don't like science you're free to not follow a subreddit all about science

43

DollyPartWithOn t1_j2zls92 wrote

I don't understand the unfriendly attitude here or the assumption that I don't like science. If you knew the history of the NIH and CDC, then you'd understand.

0

zaiyonmal t1_j2ylq57 wrote

Just admit you don’t understand how science works.

31

DollyPartWithOn t1_j2zk14q wrote

Whatdya mean? Of course, I do. Scientists have to do similar survey studies to replicate findings even if the same findings have already been found 20 or more times so they can get paid from their universities or governments.

−17

zaiyonmal t1_j2zkxsu wrote

If you think scientists like me are in it for the money, boy do I have news for you. Stick to your anti-work ethic whilst we improve your life for peanuts.

11

Feeling_Glonky69 t1_j2znqov wrote

You see, in the real world, scientific theories are tested several times, as repeated outcomes strengthens hypotheses. I’m sure you’re used to just reading random bs on FB just saying something is true, and that’s good enough for you to be fact, but us adults, we appreciate the scientific method and repeated testing for proof.

11

DollyPartWithOn t1_j2zqyb3 wrote

Nice. Very passive aggressive.

Why do you think I look at FB? I don't think you understand the point I'm making at all.

In most many many fields of science, experiments are never done again to replicate findings. And many times the findings fail to be replicated when it is actually done, sometimes because the same protocol was not followed. And sometimes studies are never replicated but are still taken as fact by governments and institutions.

So, my point is this: why do this survey study when it's been done many, many times with similar findings when it's so trivial (and a waste of resources in my opinion) and when there's a lot more studies that need replication to actually help the people being affected.

−1