A recent study published in Nature Communications examined the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort. At six months after infection, complete recovery was reported by 49.5% of subjects; at twelve months the corresponding figure was: complete recovery -50.8%; partial recovery -43.8%; unrecovered-7.4%. Among those with partial or complete recovery at six months, deterioration in recovery status at 12 months was more likely among people with depression and less likely among older and most affluent subjects.
Long COVID is a complex phenomenon that affects individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 but continue to experience symptoms and health issues.
Long COVID, the condition that affects individuals who have recovered from COVID-19 but continue to experience symptoms and health issues, is a complex phenomenon. A recent study published in Nature Communications examined the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort. The study found that at six months after infection, complete recovery was reported by 49.5% of subjects; at twelve months the corresponding figure was: complete recovery -50.8%; partial recovery -43.8%; unrecovered-7.4%. Among those with partial or complete recovery at six months, deterioration in recovery status at 12 months was more likely among people with depression and less likely among older and most affluent subjects.
Research could be finally starting to find early clues on the trail of long Covid
"central puzzle piece" in what keeps Covid raging for so long in the bodies of some people is part of the body's immune system called the complement system, which normally fights off infection by killing infected cells, continuing to attack healthy targets and causing tissue damage
Long Covid turned climbing up the stairs to her apartment into a daily battle for Lucia
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that long Covid cannot be tested for or treated despite the fact that there are currently tests available to diagnose and treat long Covid symptoms. Secondly, the article quotes a study which found significant differences in protein levels between long Covid patients but fails to mention any other studies which have not supported this finding. Thirdly, the article uses sensationalist language such as 'central puzzle piece' when describing the findings of a single study and also implies that all long Covid sufferers experience exhaustion after exercise despite evidence suggesting otherwise.
The sentence
Fallacies
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes those who suffer from long Covid by referring to them as 'sufferers' rather than people with a medical condition. Additionally, the author mentions the financial impact on patients without providing any context or evidence for this claim.
The most common are fatigue, shortness of breath, muscle pain and brain fog.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Daniel Lawler has a conflict of interest on the topic of long Covid as he is an author for Yahoo News. He also has a financial tie to the pharmaceutical industry which may influence his coverage of SARS-CoV-2 virus and complement system.
Brain fog is a common symptom in long COVID patients
Research found evidence of long-term brain injury in severe COVID-19 patients a year after contracting the virus
"central puzzle piece" in what keeps Covid raging for so long in the bodies of some people is part of the body's immune system called the complement system, which normally fights off infection by killing infected cells, continuing to attack healthy targets and causing tissue damage
Long COVID turned climbing up the stairs to her apartment into a daily battle for Lucia
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(80%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that brain fog is a common complaint among long COVID patients but fails to mention that it can also be caused by other factors such as stress and sleep disorders. Secondly, the author states that cognitive deficits were found in all patients with long COVID but does not provide any evidence to support this claim. Thirdly, the article uses sensationalist language when describing the brain damage caused by COVID-19, stating that it is equivalent to 20 years of brain aging without providing any context or explanation for how this was determined. Finally, the author quotes a study that found neuroanatomical changes in long COVID patients but fails to mention that other studies have not supported these findings.
The article claims that brain fog is a common complaint among long COVID patients but does not provide any evidence to support this claim.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article presents evidence that long COVID could be a brain injury. The author cites research that found cognitive deficits in patients who had severe COVID-19 and suggests these deficits are the result of viral-borne brain damage. However, there is no clear explanation for how this virus enters the brain or what causes it to do structural damage.
The study found that 351 patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 had evidence of a long-term brain injury a year after contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The findings were based on cognitive tests, self-reported symptoms, brain scans, and biomarkers.
Researchers found that certain regions of the brain associated with attention were reduced in volume in patients who participated in the study.
Bias
(85%)
The article discusses the possibility that long COVID could be a brain injury. The author cites evidence from a study that found cognitive deficits in patients who had severe COVID-19 and were hospitalized for at least one year after contracting the virus. These deficits are equivalent to 20 years of brain aging, according to the study's findings. Additionally, researchers have identified neuroanatomical changes in the brains of these patients that may be contributing to their cognitive problems.
Researchers have identified neuroanatomical changes in the brains of these patients that may be contributing to their cognitive problems.
The authors cite evidence from a study that found cognitive deficits in patients who had severe COVID-19 and were hospitalized for at least one year after contracting the virus. These deficits are equivalent to 20 years of brain aging, according to the study's findings.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Sara Novak has a conflict of interest on the topic of long COVID as she is reporting for Medscape which is owned by WebMD. Additionally, Karla L. Thompson and James C. Jackson are both quoted in the article without disclosing their potential conflicts of interest.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of long COVID and its effects on the brain. The article mentions that one of the authors, Karla L. Thompson, is an expert in neuroimaging and has received funding from pharmaceutical companies for research related to Alzheimer's disease.
Karla L. Thompson is an expert in neuroimaging and has received funding from pharmaceutical companies for research related to Alzheimer's disease.
The study examined the trajectory of long COVID in a general population cohort.
Among infected individuals, 12,947 provided six- and 12-month follow-up questionnaire data; the corresponding figures for noninfected subjects were 11,026 and 1,711 respectively.
At six months after infection, complete recovery was reported by 49.5% of subjects; at twelve months the corresponding figure was: complete recovery -50.8%; partial recovery -43.8%; unrecovered-7.4%.
Among those with partial or complete recovery at six months, deterioration in recovery status at 12 months was more likely among people with depression and less likely among older and most affluent subjects.
The prevalence of new and persistent symptoms increased between six to twelve months compared to the noninfected group. The percentage of individuals who reported at least one symptom remained unchanged over time in the infected group but increased in the non-infected group.
Accuracy
Among infected individuals, 12,947 provided six- and 12-month follow-up questionnaire data,
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that they examined the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort study when it's not clear if this was actually done or if data from other studies were used instead. Secondly, the author states that there is limited information on temporal changes in long COVID but then proceeds to provide detailed information about how symptoms and recovery status changed over time. This contradicts their initial statement and suggests deception. Thirdly, the author claims that they found no significant change in self-reported recovery status or the percentage of individuals with symptoms beyond six months when this is not supported by the data presented in the article.
The author states that they examined the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort study but then proceeds to provide detailed information about how symptoms and recovery status changed over time. This contradicts their initial statement and suggests deception.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses anecdotal evidence to make claims about the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort study without providing any data or statistics to support their assertions. Additionally, the author makes assumptions about socioeconomic deprivation and depression pre-infection based on self-reported data, which may not be accurate. The article also contains examples of inflammatory rhetoric when discussing the negative impact of long COVID on quality of life.
The author uses anecdotal evidence to make claims about the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort study without providing any data or statistics to support their assertions. For example, they state that 12% of subjects reported deterioration and an equivalent proportion had improvements in recovery at six months post-infection.
The author makes assumptions about socioeconomic deprivation and depression pre-infection based on self-reported data, which may not be accurate. For example, they state that people with a history of anxiety or depression were more likely to experience deterioration in recovery status at 12 months post-infection.
The article contains examples of inflammatory rhetoric when discussing the negative impact of long COVID on quality of life. For example, the author states that 'confusion (brain fog) and altered smell/taste resolved over time for some people, while others had a late-onset cough or hearing troubles.'
Bias
(85%)
The article discusses the natural history of long COVID in a general population cohort. The study found that among infected individuals, 12% reported deterioration and an equivalent proportion had improvements in recovery between six months and one year post-infection. Additionally, there was a significant decline in the prevalence of confusion (brain fog) and altered smell/taste between six months and one year post-infection among participants with improvements in recovery status. The study also found that anxiety or depression were significantly associated with increased dry cough prevalence from six to 12 months, as well as a higher prevalence of hearing problems between six and 18 months.
Additionally, there was a significant decline in the prevalence of confusion (brain fog) and altered smell/taste between six months and one year post-infection among participants with improvements in recovery status.
The study also found that anxiety or depression were significantly associated with increased dry cough prevalence from six to 12 months, as well as a higher prevalence of hearing problems between six and 18 months.
The study found that among infected individuals, 12% reported deterioration
The United States saw a bump in COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations
Research could be finally starting to find early clues on the trail of long Covid
Long COVID may cause brain injury
"central puzzle piece" in what keeps Covid raging for so long in the bodies of some people is part of the body's immune system called the complement system, which normally fights off infection by killing infected cells, continuing to attack healthy targets and causing tissue damage
Proof that symptoms aren't a figment of patient's imagination
Accuracy
The United States saw a bump in COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) COVID Data Tracker. Deaths caused by the virus have hovered around 1,400 per week since September 2023.
Long Covid may cause brain injury
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the virus has mutated to cause less severe disease which is not true as deaths caused by COVID-19 have hovered around 1400 per week since September and peaked at 2029 weekly in early January bringing the total number of deaths to 1.17 million by end of January. Secondly, it states that most people now have some form of immunity between prior infections and vaccine protection which is not true as only a small percentage of Americans have been vaccinated at this time.
The article claims that most people now have some form of immunity between prior infections and vaccine protection but only a small percentage of Americans have been vaccinated at this time.
The article claims that the virus has mutated to cause less severe disease but deaths caused by COVID-19 have hovered around 1400 per week since September and peaked at 2029 weekly in early January bringing the total number of deaths to 1.17 million by end of January.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by citing statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) without providing any context or analysis of those statistics. This is a form of informal fallacy known as 'appeal to authority'. Secondly, the article contains inflammatory rhetoric when it states that
Bias
(75%)
The article contains a statement that implies the virus has mutated to cause less severe disease. This is an example of religious bias as it assumes that God would not allow such a devastating pandemic if it was meant to be fatal.
> The virus has mutated to cause less severe disease, and most people now have some form of immunity between prior infections and vaccine protection.
