What do the relevant bits you cited have to do with you providing evidence that the research on long covid is high-quality or conclusive? I guess I should define conclusive while I'm here:
1) conclusively defines and scopes long COVID symptoms and disambiguates those symptoms from symptoms of other conditions.
2) conclusively determines the cause(s) of long COVID.
3) conclusively determines a treatment.
We already know, even from your links, that there is little to nothing for 2) or 3), and we can argue that 1) still isn't well-defined to this day.
Here's another direct reference for you from June of this year: https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/long-covid-symptoms
Begin Quote:
The World Health Organization (WHO) defines Long COVID as “the continuation or development of new symptoms 3 months after the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection, with these symptoms lasting for at least 2 months with no other explanation.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) adds that Long COVID includes a wide range of ongoing health problems that can last weeks, months, or years. The condition can affect any part of the body, and serious cases may affect multiple body systems, including the heart, lungs, kidneys, skin, and brain.
End Quote.
If the definition of symptoms includes any "new symptom" after 3 months "with no other explanation" and if it includes a "wide range of ongoing health problems", then it's pretty clear no one has conclusively scoped out what long COVID is and what it is not. "Oh, I see you're sick and we can't come up with a reason why. Let's chalk it up long COVID!"
And, of course, the best quote: "Long COVID, the condition where symptoms that surface after recovering from COVID-19 linger for weeks, months, or even years, is still a mystery to doctors and researchers.".
So there you have it. Thousands of research articles, no conclusive set of symptoms, no conclusive causes, no conclusive treatments, and still a mystery to researchers.