Nilforoshan first set out to reproduce the results of other high-profile long-COVID studies that suggested the disease had an unusually broad range of symptoms, some persisting for extended periods. He was able to match their findings exactly if he used their approach. But then he started to dig deeper. He looked to see whether long COVID appeared to cause impossible outcomes – lightning strikes, dog bites, and gunshot wounds – and found that it did.
The article is very careful to no to ruffle any feathers but it clearly shows that the whole idea of the long COVID is totally overblown.
the whole idea of the long COVID is totally overblown.
Disclaimer: I’m commenting this before having read the article.
Have you been keeping up with what happened to PhysicsGirl, a very public example of long COVID? It’s clearly a “thing”, so to speak? Or what exactly do you mean by “overblown”?
Edit: I don’t think you can generalize and say “the WHOLE IDEA of long COVID is ‘overblown’”. This for me, highlighted strongly in the article, I feel is the main takeaway:
This doesn’t mean long COVID is 98% less common. It [just] means that how we design these studies fundamentally changes which health effects we can reliably attribute to COVID.
Emphasis and a word added by me.