Hacker News Reader

Comment by noduerme | Hacker News Reader

Some guy says it's overblown and this is ranking on HN? Personally, I know several people who are not normally complainers or full of shit who have had some wild effects for 9-12 months after a bout of covid, including visual disturbances, extreme exhaustion, and loss of focus or mental acuity. I really don't doubt my friends who've suffered this. They're not the kind of folks who think they have made-up diseases or tend to malinger.

View on HN

> Some guy says it's overblown and this is ranking on HN?

The guy quoted for said statement is a professor of medicine of a reputable university, so he does have the authority thing sorted out.

Also, I feel the quote means something different than the original interpretation. After reading the article, it seems that John Bell simply states that a) long Covid is "more complicated than people assume", and b) it's incidence is lower than initial (and conservative) estimates.

The article mentions that "half of people suffering from long Covid may not have it."

And that's pretty much it.

There is no harm in improving our understanding of the real world effects of a disease.

> The guy quoted for said statement is a professor of medicine of a reputable university, so he does have the authority thing sorted out.

That’s fallacious. There are loads of professors spewing bullshit, including about their field, including at Oxford. It says nothing about the validity of the point they are making. Particularly after the point has been filtered through journalists with a questionable understanding of science.

> That’s fallacious. There are loads of professors spewing bullshit,

No, not really. The fallacious bit is blindly and outright dismissing any statement, along with attacking and accusing anything a researcher says as being "spewing bullshit", just because you didn't liked hearing it.

Eve though I agree that appeals to authority are no way to get close to the truth, what we are seeing here is pure denialism and a primal anti-intellectual attitude directed towards a researcher from a reputable university just because he dared point out that initial conservative estimates might have been conservative.

To be quite clear, John Bell does not dictate the truth just because he is a professor of medicine at Oxford. But that is not the problem. The problem is actually trying to attack him just because he had the audacity to quote statistics on the real-world incidence of long Covid and state that initial estimates were off.

Well, quoting him is not major-breakthrough-worthy but I reckon he deserves an article based on the quote. Toutes proportions gardees ofc.

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n490

Sounds like the BMJ dont trust this chap and are questioning his financial interests. Therefore I would question his motives with regard to this article, he isnt very forthcoming which is usually indicative of having something to hide.

> Sounds like the BMJ dont trust this chap and are questioning his financial interests.

The article you mentioned only refers to stock portfolio and potential conflicts of interest regarding policy decisions on performing antibody tests.

The statement that was quoted in this discussion is about an entirely unrelated subject: the prevalence of long Covid. The initial claim is that the statement is supported by data from the Office for National Statistics.

If you want to question John Bell's claim regarding the prevalence of long Covid, just check if his statement is corroborated by the data. Either it's supported or not.

I question his impartiality on making statements such as this. I wonder about what he gains from making statements like this? If he was open about questions put to him in the past then I would be less suspect, but given he has hidden his financial interests related to his work then I suspect he has some hidden motivation here too.

> I question his impartiality on making statements such as this.

There is a very good way to verify the claims: check the data.

Dragging in questions regarding antibody test policies, stock portfolios, and potential conflicts of interest just sound like cheap character assassination attempts that have absolutely no relation with the prevalence of long Covid.

He doesn't present the data, he asks us to take his word for it, or the article does at least. Therefore to decide whether I can accept his word I need to know about him and his character. From initial research into him there are some queries about his behaviour, raised by an organisation that I do trust, therefore I do not accept his claim without question.

Don't accept things blindly because you agree with them (or the converse), "be a good judge of who is a good judge".

> He doesn't present the data (...)

If that's what you're going with then you only need to verify the data to either refute or verify his claim.

Everything else is just noise at this point.

How do I verify it when I don't have it and he doesn't provide it?

> How do I verify it when I don't have it and he doesn't provide it?

You didn't even bothered to look, did you?

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan...

> a professor of medicine of a reputable university

That is not nearly good enough.

This is HN. We should be posting peer-reviewed research results, not just-any-professor-in-the-field's-feelings.

>"half of people suffering from long Covid may not have it."

That's a completely baseless statement, and there is some serious fuckery going on here, either with the article, or the supposed expert they're citing.

If we're going to throw anecdotes around, a very close relative of mine has had a severe reaction to the Covid Vaccine (AZ, I believe), and has been off work for 6 months and counting with a variety of health issues.

Anecdotes only count if they agree with the zeitgeist propaganda, I’m afraid.

I have a relative who is an ICU nurse, he had effects for up to 6 months afterwards. They have always been an active, outdoors type of person, the change was obvious to all around them. Fortunately it has got better, eventually. So yeah these articles, especially from this section of the press, are more likely to be based on political ideology than medical fact.

Remember these are the same media organisations that will deny climate change and find scientists who will push that agenda for them. Just because they have a pulpit, it doesn't make them correct.

I think you should have control of hacker news and personally curate articles. Everyone is trying to fool everyone else, high morality people like you are rare.

Have you considered that some of these symptoms are consequences of locking down society and preventing real human interaction for 18 months? I haven’t had COVID and I have had more depression and exhaustion in the last year than in my entire life.

Was there any place on the planet that had 18 months of uninterrupted lockdowns, preventing real human interaction? The pandemic has hit in waves, and lockdowns were usually only applied when needed.

I think the uncertainty made it worse. Uncertainty is a common trigger for depression and malaise.

How can we differentiate COVID and lockdown symptoms?

if you (God forbid) have covid symptoms, you'll differentiate.

That's not a scientific answer. Physical symptoms of stress include:

Low energy

Headaches

Upset stomach, including diarrhea, constipation, and nausea

Aches, pains, and tense muscles

Chest pain and rapid heartbeat

Insomnia

Frequent colds and infections

Loss of sexual desire and/or ability

Nervousness and shaking, ringing in the ear, cold or sweaty hands and feet

Dry mouth and difficulty swallowing

Clenched jaw and grinding teeth

Sounds like all of the physical symptoms of so-called long-COVID.

On top of the stress that would undoubtedly afflict a significant fraction of COVID patients, due to the massively inflated fears surrounding COVID, is the effects of physical isolation.

One of the requirements for all COVID positive cases is two weeks of total physical isolation. Numerous studies have shown that humans being physically isolated has significant negative health effects. No in person contact. No physical touch. For two weeks. All COVID positive cases, even asymptomatic ones.

There are no randomized studies, that control for factors, like the aforementioned psychological distress emanating from fear of COVID, and physical isolation, that suggests COVID causes these long-term symptoms. There are a host of potential confounding factors that could explain these correlations better than damage from the COVID infection.

Notice how extreme rigor is demanded for the ivermectin studies but then really just mere correlations is enough to draw scare mongering conclusions about COVID.

I've had all those symptoms during lockdown and I know I haven't had covid. My friends who have had it describe a much, much worse experience. I suppose stress alone can cause visual hallucinations on the order of the road twisting in front of your car, but I know these people and trust their judgment that they have experienced the after effects of a brain-damaging infection.

You cannot rely on anecdotes. I know people who claim that many of their relatives suffered severe adverse effects after taking the vaccine. We do not draw scientific conclusions from anecdotes.

you cannot rely on anecdotes.

But: pretty much every single anecdote I've heard (online, or meatspace) tells a very consistent story. Maybe it should be studied. But I guess if some professor at a "prestigious university" says it's all psychosomatic, then I guess not.

By all means, study it. But please don't peddle unproven theories as fact, and demand policy that restricts other people's civil and economic liberties, be instituted on the basis of these speculative unproven theories.

> That's not a scientific answer. Physical symptoms of stress include:

I feel you inadvertently tried to misrepresent the symptoms of long Covid.

Please check wikipedia's article on long Covid for an objective and we'll sourced reference on the subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_COVID

Among the typical symptoms we have "fatigue, headaches, shortness of breath, anosmia (loss of smell), parosmia (distorted smell), muscle weakness, low fever and cognitive dysfunction".

Feeling fatigued alone does not pass off as long Covid, jus like coughing alone does not pass off as Covid.

For the sake of having a non-inflammatory discussion, please do your best to substantiate and source these sort of claim so that we avoid spreading disinformation.

>>Feeling fatigued alone does not pass off as long Covid,

That is not true. Here is a typical study purportedly showing evidence for long COVID:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/28/covid-37-of-pe...

>>One in three people infected with coronavirus will experience at least one symptom of long Covid, a new study suggests.

The most common symptom associated with "long-COVID" is anxiety..

> That is not true. Here is a typical study purportedly showing evidence for long COVID:

You've said "study" but you're quoting an article from The Guardian.

Also, it seems you even failed to read your source. Your article does not refer to the incidence of long COVID-19. Your source only refers to a statistical study of the prevalence of any of the symptoms that are attributed to long COVID-19, whose goal is clearly to gather data to help understand the problem, or even if one really exists.

Also, I feel you are either misquoting or being disingenuous. The article you quoted quite clearly states that "The most common symptoms were breathing problems, abdominal symptoms, fatigue, pain and anxiety or depression."

So, a charitable interpretation of your misunderstanding of what you've quoted is that you picked up a reference to a study whose purpose is to gather initial observations on the actual incidence of long Covid, looked at the raw data and unwittingly misinterpreted correlations for consequences.

>>You've said "study" but you're quoting an article from The Guardian.

An article which describes the results of a study..

>>Also, I feel you are either misquoting or being disingenuous. The article you quoted quite clearly states that "The most common symptoms were breathing problems, abdominal symptoms, fatigue, pain and anxiety or depression."

I'm referring to the graph in that article, which shows that anxiety/depression is the most commonly cited symptom, at 15% of survey respondents:

https://i.ibb.co/27yyhGG/long-covid-symptoms.png

>>Your article does not refer to the incidence of long COVID-19.

Yes it does. Long-COVID typically refers to any expression of any of the symptoms listed, following a COVID infection.

> An article which describes the results of a study..

Presenting your own editorialized conclusions is not the same as providing a primary source.

The proof is that you've tried to pass off a study on the quantification of the real world correlation of symptoms tentatively linked to long covid as, somehow, proof of a causal relationship, even though nothing of the sort was suggested.

You're inadvertently demonstrated the need to check primary sources, and the role that tabloids play in disseminating misinformation

>>Presenting your own editorialized conclusions is not the same as providing a primary source.

This is a discussion forum. You seem to have an axe to grind with me that's motivated by more than just what I wrote. Are you this non-charitable and critical of those who are sounding the alarm about COVID? This double standard, motivated by political preconceptions, is how dissenting viewpoints are suppressed, and only one viewpoint - that of COVID hysteria - is allowed to express itself.

>>The proof is that you've tried to pass off a study on the quantification of the real world correlation of symptoms tentatively linked to long covid as, somehow, proof of a causal relationship, even though nothing of the sort was suggested.

To clarify, my criticism is of the many who are in fact taking these preliminary results, and drawing the conclusion that long-COVID is afflicting one third of all COVID patients.

So to comment on one of those symptoms: chest pain. I do experience this when resting, but I get particularly strong pain when doing any kind of exercise. If it were stress related you would expect exercise to improve symptoms not make them worse.

I would also add that while I was certainly a bit depressed by the lockdown, I live in the UK where we are no longer locked down and my mental health has improved greatly. But I am still unable to participate in vigorous exercise, and tire much much more easily than my friends. And this is despite going for regular walks during lockdown.

Finally, I would comment that post viral fatigue is a well established phenomenon for other viral diseases including flu. And has also been noted to be particularly bad in other coronaviruses like the original SARS. So it’s hardly a stretch to think that cocos might have similar effects.

>>I do experience this when resting, but I get particularly strong pain when doing any kind of exercise. If it were stress related you would expect exercise to improve symptoms not make them worse.

One study on pro-athletes found that 0.6% of cases were confirmed, after cardiac MRI, to have inflammatory heart disease post COVID infection:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2021/03/few-pro-...

This is only 1/10th as much as the percentage who report chest pain. Some caveats: these are young adults, and athletes, so probably in the lowest risk category. Other demographics could face much higher risks.

So I guess the chest pain could be a real symptom of long-COVID, but I am much more skeptical of the other symptoms (e.g. anxiety, depression, etc).

It's also worth noting that heart inflammation from infections like flu will generally subside over time.

Frankly, it's the issues that seem to stem from disruption of neurons in the prefrontal cortex that are the most worrisome. The loss of taste and smell in covid is not caused by congestion, it's caused by a viral attack in the nasal bulb, and it's generally a harbinger of visual and emotional disturbances. One could easily make the case that the drastic rise in violent incidents in public spaces across the world has not been due to the effects of local and sporadic lockdowns on psychological health, but more likely due to the partial frontal lobotomies being performed by the virus.

Where is the evidence for the disruption of neurons in the prefrontal cortex?

>>One could easily make the case that the drastic rise in violent incidents in public spaces across the world has not been due to the effects of local and sporadic lockdowns on psychological health, but more likely due to the partial frontal lobotomies being performed by the virus.

You don't think it could be a result of massive numbers of careers being destroyed, businesses going bankrupt, and people being physically isolated, as governments restrict people's economic and civil liberties?

And isn't it possible that fearful speculation of the type you're engaging in, is creating political support for the restrictions that are creating all of these adverse social effects?

How do you expect to control for the world-wide psychosocial impact of the pandemic?

It's also pretty widely known that virtually all viruses can have a post-viral syndrome so if it would be MORE surprising if there wasn't a long covid.

I've had long covid for the last 10 months, and finally seem to be coming out of it. At its worst, I would get "episodes" where my entire body would start buzzing, so extreme that it felt like I was plugged into an electric socket. I can't convey to you how extreme this was, and if anyone were to suggest that this was caused by pandemic stress, they would be liable to a stressed response from my fist.

>>How do you expect to control for the world-wide psychosocial impact of the pandemic?

You use antibody tests to find undiagnosed prior cases, where the patient was unaware they had it during their infection. Then you can compare those who had COVID, without the associated psychosocial impact and two week isolation, to those who did not, to try to determine what long-term impact COVID has.

All of those statements about stress are complete unscientific garbage, until someone comes up with a test, which can show some kind of chemical or biological marker that indicates what stress actually is, rather than some vague squishy thing that some people have and others don't.

Also: what if the stress symptoms they're feeling, are due to the body fighting long-covid?

What's "complete unscientific garbage" is taking a correlation between a dozen self-reported symptoms, and a COVID infection months before, and deducing that it proves the latter caused the former. There are numerous potential confounding factors, and no real science would dismiss these, and claim a controlled and randomized experiment is not necessary before drawing conclusions.

I know someone who, six months later is still struggling to balance, suffering with cognitive problems as well as chronic recall and speech problems. We can differentiate between Long Covid and "lockdown symptoms" because nobody suffers any of these by staying indoors more often than usual and having a reduced social life.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com