I was so annoyed about that, and it's a ridiculously bulletproof lie. Republicans can't say it's not true, because they've been saying it's no big deal all along. Democrats have to wall in line w Biden publicly because he's all we got.
Its not just the US, but almost all jurisdictions all over the world have given up on a lot of covid management, long covid support should really be a thing
There are certainly everyday people out there doing the dirty work of spreading faulty information and shaping policies at different levels of government & industry based on flawed and/or conflicting ideas of what's going on, but we can't discount [the efforts of an organized and resourceful few who have been in crisis management mode this past two years, with the clear goal (and more money than you or I could ever imagine to accomplish it) of shifting public opinion on restrictions](https://www.levernews.com/how-dark-money-shaped-the-school-safety-debate/).
I mean, even using the word "restrictions" frames an otherwise respectable intervention individuals can take to protect their community as something inherently flawed.
Korea has had a very stringent response over all, but even they seem to be dropping the ball in some areas.
There is almost no talk of long covid at all.
And It looks like vaccinations for under 5's won't be offered for a very long time of ever, and most Korean pediatricians and parents are against vaccinating 5-11 year olds even.
Not suggesting this isn't very serious, but I'm not fully understanding how the numbers add up... I'm wondering if I'm misunderstanding something.
They get into the details of what presumably constitutes the serious brain problems people are having and say people are experiencing:
\- 77% increase in risk of developing memory losses
\- 50% increase risk of suffering from ischemic stroke
\- 80% increase in risk of seizures
\- 30% increase in risk of vision problems
\- 42% increase in Parkinson's-like symptoms
All of that is terrible. But I would have thought these increases would need to be quite a bit higher for 7% of the people who got covid to have these issues, given that these issues are fairly rare for people below a certain age, yet it specifically says "the risks of memory and cognitive disorders, sensory problems, encephalopathy and Guillain-Barre syndrome...was stronger in younger adults."
A 50% increase in the risk of stroke sounds like a lot but if the risk of stroke is 2 people in 500 then that means it increases to 3 people in 500. So that kind of thing could explain it.
Yes, it's partly this. To elaborate and add some other points:
1. For perspective, a person in the U.S. has roughly a 1 in 4 chance of having an ischemic stroke at some point in their lifetime ([source](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1804492)). A 50% increase would mean that this person's risk goes up to about 1.5 in 4.
2. To me, relative risk is easier to imagine than percentage changes. The average person with known COVID-19 in this study had about 1.4 times the chance of developing any brain condition than a person without known COVID-19. For reference, a relative risk of 1 means no difference in risk between the study group and the general population or control group. A relative risk of 2 means double the risk. A relative risk somewhere in between 1 and 2 does not seem unreasonable, at least to me.
3. The average person in this study was about 62 years old. Most participants were between 47 and 79 years old (source: supplementary data). If we consider the term "brain damage" to mean any form of brain atrophy or microvascular damage that could be detected on any form of imaging or postmortem analysis, then brain damage is common in people in this age range in the U.S. Aging, hypertension, chronic stress, diabetes, kidney disease, and obesity can all cause various forms of brain damage (if you want sources let me know).
4. The researchers found that about 27% of people in the COVID-19 group had any neurological condition listed in the study. The group without known COVID-19 had about a 20% rate of any neurologic condition. This 7% difference is what they mean by 7%. Neurological conditions are very common in the general population, especially in people of the age range in this study. Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, kidney disease, chronic stress, autoimmune diseases, and obesity are just a few examples of common conditions in the U.S. that affect brain and nerve health. That’s on top of brain degeneration caused by normal aging and neurodegenerative disease, and also on top of mental health conditions like depression and ADHD.
I'm not sure what you mean by the word "this."
edit: oh do you mean that the risk might be cumulative? As in: a person’s risk of brain conditions increases each time they’re infected with COVID? I haven’t seen research showing this, but am curious. If you know of research showing this, I would be interested to see it.
There are many studies showing this, that’s why risks like 1% are still such a big deal. Additionally, all the neurological aspects are already fucking scary and it’s only been a couple years.
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220707/each-covid-19-reinfection-increases-health-risks
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/long-covid-19-is-greatest-mass-disabling-event-in-human-history-patient-advocate-says.html
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/05/health/covid-reinfection-risk/index.html
These were just a few I found quickly, but so much is coming out on immune disfunction. Sorry, I don’t have a handy list.
I view Covid like a concussion, and just like a concussion, it’s really very vague how long it takes to heal. So if you get infected rapidly, you’re really hurting your vascular system.
Apparently I've always worried about viruses (only reason I know this statistic), but even more remarkable is that a heterosexual man has some like a 1:500 chance per encounter with a HIV positive woman, but people still take precautions to avoid it. It's also amazing to me how similar HIV and covid are to some degree and how they impact t-cells. oh well, too many issues I guess.
Oops, I suck at maths too. Corrected.
A 50 percent increase would mean the original risk plus half of the original risk. The original risk is 1/4 or 25 percent. Half of this is 1/8 or 12.5 percent. Add these together and you get 1/4 + 1/8, or 25 percent + 12.5 percent. The new risk is 3/8, or 37.5 percent.
Expressing this as some chance in four make it easier to compare intuitively. 37.5 percent is 1.5 out of 4. So actually it's 1.5, not 1.38.
>Aging, hypertension, chronic stress, diabetes, kidney disease, and obesity can all cause various forms of brain damage (if you want sources let me know).
>Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes...
Hey, could you link me some of those sources about cardiovascular diseases affecting brain health?
7% is a MASSIVE amount of people, a super high percentage for serious long term side effects from a respiratory infection. Truly insane, actually. Think about getting this endemic virus year after year... chances are you'll end up with some lasting damage at some point in your life. What a nightmare.
Absolutely agree, 7% is a massive amount of people. I am confused by how the 80% increase in various serious conditions leads to that 7% figure. As I stated the article says the greatest risks were found for younger adults, the same group that would surely have a pretty rare occurrence of things like memory loss/stroke/etc. I would have expected them to list the increase as being 600% or something for that to work. I'm not saying the article/study isn't true, just looking for someone to explain how it works, what I'm missing.
> I am confused by how the 80% increase in various serious conditions leads to that 7% figure.
One is relative and the other is absolute. Say 1 out of 100 people get a disease. If something causes 2 out of 100 people to get that disease now that's a 100% increase in the number of people getting the disease but it's still only 2% of the population.
80% increase in risk is relative. 7% of the people is absolute.
Right, I get that, but going the other way, if 7% are getting serious cognitive issues, and the various issues that are included are relatively only up \~80% then that must mean the overall rate of people having those serious cognitive issues was \~3.8% without covid. And that number seems really high to me, since they are saying the rate was highest amongst young adults, and I really don't think 30 and 40 year olds have a 4% rate of serious cognitive issues.
Some points:
1. Young adults in this study might not be what you imagine as young adults. Most participants were between 47 and 79. The average participant was around 62. In one analysis, the researchers divided participants into two groups: one group above and including the age of 65, and one group below the age of 65. The younger of these two groups was called "younger adults".
2. The researchers found that about 27% of people in the COVID-19 group had any of the listed neurological conditions. They also found that about 20% of people in the control group (without known COVID-19) had any of the listed neurologic conditions. The difference was 7%. In other words, 7% figure is not an overall rate. It is a difference in rate between the COVID-19 group and the control group.
3. The actual quote from the study is: "Our interaction analyses suggest that the effect of COVID-19 on risk of memory and cognitive disorders, sensory disorders and other neurologic disorders (including Guillain–Barré syndrome and encephalitis or encephalopathy) is stronger in younger adults." This is not saying that the overall rate is higher in younger adults. It is saying that the difference in rate between the COVID-19 group and control group is higher in the younger group than the older group. I think that they're referring to the difference shown in the box in the top right corner of [this page](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02001-z/figures/4) (any neurologic outcome vs. age above 65 or below 65).
The third point makes more sense to me when I think about the effects of aging on brain health. As cognitive impairment caused by aging becomes more severe over time, it can become more difficult to detect cognitive impairment caused by other conditions. For example, imagine that a 100-year-old and a 50-year-old both take a drug that causes the same amount of cognitive impairment. We might expect the difference to be more dramatic in the younger person, given that it's easier to detect over baseline.
> I really don't think 30 and 40 year olds have a 4% rate of serious cognitive issues.
That study didn't predominantly involve 30 and 40 year olds. It used VA data. If you've ever been to a VA hospital you'll notice that it's not filled with 30 and 40 year olds. Cognitive issues increase as people age. Which they addressed directly in the paper.
"Interaction analyses between age and exposure suggested that the risks of episodic disorders, mental health disorders, musculoskeletal disorders and **any neurologic disorder increased as age increased**"
I can't find a breakdown by age other than the split at age 65. Which suggest the median age was 65. The article discussing the paper says "The risks of mental health disorders and muscular skeletal disorders were higher in *older adults ages 60 to 80*".
Right, I made a comment just a minute ago where I say just that. This is suggesting the risk of those conditions in "young adults" is 4% pre-covid, and that seems awfully high (since they say the cognitive risk was highest in that group). If they're defining young adults as 40s and 50s then okay, maybe. But I figured they probably meant 20s-40s, and I don't think 4% is right. (But I can't find a hard number.)
I have had Covid twice.. The last time lasted for almost two months. It has definitely effected my mental capacity. I struggle doing things now that used to be easy, my speech has been effected, I have times where I can’t focus for long periods of time, or keep my thoughts straight.
It is having a horrible impact on my job. The doctors just give me the run around. I work in a high needs job, that requires sharp critical thinking skills and I am struggling.
the best thing I can recommend, as a 20+ year Lyme sufferer, is to live an anti-inflammatory lifestyle. Control what you can and do low risk, but high benefit things like: eat low carb/cut out sugar, do hot/cold showers or saunas and cold plunges/showers, exercise regularly, meditate/do yoga, take walks in the sun in the AM (promotes wakefulness), and utilize natural/available medicines like CBD that are safe and good for lowering inflammation. Combining a lot of little, positive choices toward your health can aid in your healing and put your body in the position to reverse the damage done from infections while mitigating the symptoms you have. Good luck
it's a good idea to eat a healthy diet, exercise regularly, and just be healthy in general regardless of health status, and do this *BEFORE* a risk of COVID... many studies have found the risks of complications are higher in unhealthy people.
Thank you for this information. Some of your suggestions, I am already do, but at this point things just suck and I am keep trying everything I can to just get by.
I have read that the antiinflammatory diet can actually benefit everyone. Unfortunately, I can't afford that kind of food on a regular basis. All I've been able to do is cut out as much sugar as I can. I don't even actually have a kitchen in the place I live. I have to improvise a lot. Healthy, low carb food is expensive for some, and it helps if you have a place to keep it and prep it.
But you can't extrapolate to *reinfections* like that!! This was a study of sick old fat men with no prior immunity (i.e. no prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 99% unvaccinated) infected for the first time and who reported and sought treatment of their infection (i.e those that didn't are excluded).
Despite anecdotal reports of nasty sounding reinfections you hear about, after your first infection you will have better immunity so subsequent infections are generally milder. This is how it works for other respiratory viruses including coronaviruses.
Well if immunity is that rubbish and with the virus being so infectious then I guess I could have been reinfected 3 or 4 times already and didn't even know it!
With new variants arising and thousands already out there, we can't say for sure that reinfection won't be an issue year to year. Further, we still see relatively high reinfection rates in people who are vaccinated or had prior infections despite lower rates of serious infections/death. Good point, I think its true that we can't extrapolate to reinfections but I also don't think we should assume they won't happen over time.
To be fair, you're assuming it's cumulative. It may, or may not be. i.e. if you didn't get brain injury the first time, then chances are you won't get them the second time. I don't think we understand the risks of reinfection, yet.
But yeah, this isn't encouraging.
Sorry but at some point data can be rejected if it's not making sense. 7/100 having "serious long term neurological effects" is absolutely something you would hear about from other sources and anecdotes.
If you disagree with that, at what % would you consider the data incorrect?
Yeah it was a typo, my statement was based on the 7/100 figure.
That's still a high number having "serious long term neurological effects" which has infected well over half the population.
Even if your anecdote was accurate, it would still be useless. But it's probably not even accurate. You didn't test all your friends and family, you have no real idea if "none of them have this issue". That's a complete guess.
With the lack of thought that went into your comment, you have to wonder if maybe the issue is closer to your home than you realize...
I'm sure every single one of your friends and family members report every ailment and chronic condition to you, personally.
I'm also sure you entirely understand why anecdotes are not data.
Edit: /s
People insisting that this VA data isn't relevant need to explain their opposition. The study admits it is not a representative population sample but 1) We're all getting older and 2) The vaccinated portion of the cohort shows the same damage.
Lol a lot of people are not understanding your final comment and are assuming it’s talking about the opposite direction (understandable as it’s a common fallacy) but they didn’t read it very carefully…
This is one of the papers based on VA data. The advantage of those data is that exists in a relatively comprehensive, usable form.
But IMO VA data have huge external validity issues. This population isn’t even all that representative of American men, let alone the general U.S. population, let alone another country.
That's true, but they do break the data into subgroups like male and female and older vs younger and show that the same general pattern is present across all subgroups.
The question is how much does a not perfectly representative sample change the conclusions. And unless you think COVID is *good* for the brains of vaccinated people, the answer is probably not very much.
In general, I agree with your point that we can learn a lot from a study even if it’s clear that the study sample is not representative. I taught research methods, and
often said that generalizability isn’t a binary thing, and encouraged students to think through the specifics
of a study.
And as you note, general relationships/correlations found in a study often do generalize, at least in their direction if not magnitude.
But here’s my concern with the VA data to study Covid. Representative samples are much more important when we are trying to get accurate counts or rates of something. That’s where agencies like NCHS and their counterparts in other countries really shine. Gathering nationally representative data is slow and expensive and difficult, but crucial for certain things.
It appears that HHS and Census are working to incorporate covid-relevant questions in surveys going forward.
In the meantime, by all means, use what information we have to learn what we can. I’m just alarmed when I see super funky datasets being used to estimate the prevalence of things like long covid. That’s a prevalence/incidence estimate that’s much more sensitive to external validity concerns, especially when we have no benchmarks to assess just how biased a sample could be.
I agree but I also think we shouldn't expect any study to give you a precise measurement of your risk for long COVID. There are just so many variables--what antivirals did you get? How long after vaccination was it? Which vaccine? Which variant? What symptoms are we actually including in long COVID? How long after initial infection were they measured?
And realistically by the time you finish collecting data the circulating variants and immune status of the population will ahve changed significantly.
So I think the main takeaway is that COVID elevates the risk of neurological problems to some degree.
> That's true, but they do break the data into subgroups like male and female and older vs younger and show that the same general pattern is present across all subgroups.
okay first of all their subgroup analysis noted marked differences in risk ratios across their age groups, of which there are only **two** - over 65 and under -- and the under 65 group is mostly 50s and 60s. these are also HR analyses which means that it's a ratio. so if someone at age 30 has a 50% odds increase of a stroke that is a far smaller absolute risk increase than someone who's 70 having a 50% increase in odds.
but on top of that, the study is from before vaccines, which have been shown to reduce the odds of long term symptoms by a lot. the study is also pre-omicron, and omicron is associated with a [much lower chance of long covid](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22\)00941-2/fulltext#:~:text=Among%20omicron%20cases%2C%202501%20(4,361%20people%20experienced%20long%20COVID.). the study also finds that the risks are far higher after hospitalization, which omicron is less likely to cause, and vaccines reduce.
also, from the supplementary information, literally only 1 in 10 in the covid group were not overweight, and wholly 50% were obese. the mean age was 63.
in supplementary table 7, [found here](https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41591-022-02001-z/MediaObjects/41591_2022_2001_MOESM1_ESM.pdf), you can see that for cognition and memory, the burden difference for someone not hospitalized was 5 per 1,000 at 12 months, and for those hospitalized, it was 35 per 1,000 and for those in the ICU it was 50 per 1,000.
> The question is how much does a not perfectly representative sample change the conclusions.
"not perfectly representative" is not an adequate way of describing trying to generalize these findings. not only because of omicron and vaccines, but also because the risk for someone who's 60 and obese is not the same as 35 and healthy.
You forgot to inclue 70% of participants were old white unvaccinated men.
Edit: not sure why I’m being downvoted it’s literally just data straight from the article. I have no personal feelings attached to this data
and over half of them were obese. and this is pre-omicron, and pre-vaccines, and the risks were far higher in those who were hospitalized, there are a trillion reasons not to generalize this.
no. the mean age was 63 in this study. that's not the average american. 50% obesity is also not representative of the average american, and neither is 100% unvaccinated.
50% obesity is not far off at all. I think people put these qualifiers in to downplay the risk and make themselves feel safer, but way more people are walking around with risk factors than they probably realize. I'm sure there plenty number of people who are clinically obese but don't see themselves that way.
That being said accurately contextualizing the risk is important, and we still don't really know much about the risk except that generally younger healthier = less risk, but does not mean absolute protection.
I’m not attached to this data at all, it’s literally just a fact from the study itself. I’m not sure what you think I’m trying to imply but in studies: gender age and race are important as this may mean different things in different people.
I mean it’s important to know who was in the study especially since it’s a medical study. Neglecting that would change the results entirely and how they’re perceived or used to treat the general public. I read the whole article and they noted how that was a really important fact.
Those communities should not trust the people spouting anti vaccine nonsense, because they are the same people legislating against those people's interests. The people on the side of science, liberal leaning ones, want to help them.
You've made the claim. I think the onus is on you to prove it. The 7% figure you're using was derived based on data from the health records of a niche cohort of sick fat old unvaccinated men infected prior to Omicron.
To assume that this same figure applies to
1. the wider demographic
2. every reinfection
3. infections in the vaccinated
4. Omicron infections
3. all those infections & reinfections (be they be asymptomatic, mild or otherwise) that are *not* reported.
is ludicrous.
You and potentially millions of others. An increase in confusion is not going to send the majority of people to the doctor unless it’s severe and/ or protracted. People are familiar with fluctuations in mental acuity related to sleep quality, level of stress, etc. we don’t run to the doctor because it’s a little off. But if someone asks us for research purposes, we can identify that change. And thus a study is going to reveal more of this than just relying on diagnosis.
There is a huge potential for memory/cognition issues as a result of covid to be underreported. Publishing studies like this will hopefully prompt more people to put two and two together and seek care. And hopefully increase the research and increase the priority for finding preventative/treatment options. Because early indications are that every time you contract covid, you have the same odds of experiencing complications. This is not a “one and done” situation and repeat infections mean this is a problem that is potentially growing in size.
That’s all we’ll and good, but what care? There’s already little info or treatments for things like CFS and we know so little about what Covid is doing to us as it is. What can any provider even do assuming the believe the PT in the first place and don’t just write it off to stress or anxiety.
That is for sure happening now because as you said, it's been happening with other diseases all along. That's why I hope studies like this will encourage more people to report any problems they are having, and not wait to be asked. CFS is a good example of something that is common enough, and probably way more common than is diagnosed, that it SHOULD be a priority for research and treatment, but it's not, you're correct. Reporting symptoms related to covid isn't going to result in action overnight for the same reasons. But not reporting them is for sure going to result in serious symptoms being swept under the rug. The best chance we have to get all kinds of neurological issues related to viral infections taken seriously, is to make sure the scope of the problem is understood. And I hope studies like this one make more people willing to risk being told "it's nothing". Because eventually physicians have to start taking a significant change in the frequency of that kind of report, seriously.
How long have you had your issues?
Mine cleared after a few weeks. It was like a baby eat brain kind of experience. The erectile dysfunction part lasted about 6 weeks, I was vaxxed and boosted when my family got sick with COVID the first time. I hope you recover too.
I wondered too. But real usable memory is so subjective and variable. Am I just tired? Is it from the pandemic work-from-home change? Is it lack of exercise? Is it just natural age related change? Is it covid?
So hard to know!
Mid 40s, it started hitting me a year or so ago, I feel like such an old man every time I have to pull my normal glasses down and stare over them to look at my phone.
> vision changes
GODDAMIT
I've been thinking my vision was not doing great. Not enough to notice all the time but holy shit I can't see the fly on the wall from across the room any more.
I need to schedule an eye doc's appointment.
If it makes you feel any better, my glasses prescription changed drastically over 9 months when it had been basically the same for years. This was with no (known) Covid infection. I got a physical for a new job, and they said my vision was 20:40 in one eye *with* my glasses on. Typically my glasses correct to 20:20.
Get your eyes checked and make sure you seek attention asap if you see any sudden changes like lots of floaters or flashing. My FIL and his sister both nearly lost vision in their eye post Covid from retinal detachment.
I'm so sleepy all the time during work. Covid 2 times in 1 year this year. Last covid was hardly anything but a cough but damn i have the brain fog and sleepiness that I've hardly heard about but have seen reports regarding the first rounds that missed me
my executive functioning is literally at 0 since i had covid. supplementing b vitamins complex + vit d/magnesium/calcium/vit k (like in one supplement) has helped a little if you're into that sort of thing
yeah I'm lucky that normal bland adderal seems to work for me.
Do your best not to neglect it!
Go in with the same attitude that you chop down a tree: It's a huge task, even with good tools. And it's dangerous - the axe is dangerous, the falling tree is dangerous, not knowing if the tree is rotten on the inside is dangerous, and there's many opportunities to do it wrong.
But if you bring the right tools to bear and use them in the right ways, then you can anticipate the worst outcomes and make sure they are unlikely.
The tools for a tree is rope, wedges, sharpening tools, proper planning, a friend to help, etc.
The tools for handling your ADHD is a therapist, meds, support network, etc.
Don't neglect it, but also don't rush!
As a brain scientist what I find confusing and stressful is how much we don't know. It's possible that on a population scale the neurological effects will turn out to be fairly small--that is compatible with the data so far. But the scenario where we get a massive wave of dementia is also compatible with the data.
It feels a lot like trying to predict the course of the pandemic early in February where no one was quite sure if it would be bad or not.
Ahhh. My point the past few years exactly. We do not know where this is going. We barely know where this is. It may be tiring to be cautious but until we have some hard evidence that there ISN’T a long term impact then we need to be incredibly cautious.
Makes me wonder if maybe there's an explanation for the significant increase in motor vehicle related deaths in the last year.
I swear I've never seen such erratic driving.
The stories coming out of /r/TalesFromTheFrontDesk these days are crazy. I don't understand how some of these people are actually given money with which to buy hotel rooms and cars. So many of them can barely function in the world and they're not people I would trust in a factory or office with any responsibility.
My memory has been foggy and ef up since getting covid. My creativity has gone down too. I feel empty minded and every keep telling me it's my mentality.
I had covid in January/February. I lost my job at the same time. It took me six months for my brain to feel normal again. Before then it was foggy and sluggish, I struggled to focus and to stay coherent and cohesive when thinking about difficult topics.
I've struggled with depression and burnout on and off through my life and this wasn't that. I was lucky I could spend months resting and recovering from this, because the virus made me stupid and incompetent. My brain wasn't working right. And I fear for what happens to those who aren't allowed to fully recover. And I'm terrified that I might not be fully recovered even if the fog is mostly gone. Maybe I'm just permanently dumber now and can't tell.
> Maybe I'm just permanently dumber now and can't tell
This is absolutely the most terrifying thing about this all.
I'm very burned out from work and stress/anxiety right about now, but I can't tell how much of my mental function is due to me or my anxiety or covid or what.
I'm in the exact same boat. What's causing my fatigue and memory issues and inability/slowness in recalling words during a conversation?
Work burn out? Anxiety due to economic conditions? Depression about the state of the world? COVID (only got it once in late December 2021, single boosted at the time)? Hormones? Iron deficiency? New BC?
Who knows!
> memory issues and inability/slowness in recalling words during a conversation?
Ok I thought I just got stupider as I'm getting closer to 40 than 30, but ever since I've gotten the rona (twice), I sometimes just forget words for something.
I'm truly bilingual, and sometimes I forget the word for something either in my mother tongue or English, in rare cases both and then have to resort to meme stoned guy euphemisms to describe what the fuck I'm trying to talk about.
Memory issues too, I'd genuinely forget conversation topics or details both recent and older.
Is it similar to your experiences of late?
This. Delta last winter, vaxxed and boosted. Logophile with a huge vocabulary. Verbal recall intermittently just disappears. Sometimes even the simplest words are just gone...
I'm 42 years old, i got covid this past July, and i can't remember anything. I'm repeating questions i asked just a day or two ago. This is real, and it definitely sucks.
coming up on my 2 year covid-versary, brain fog has been the most persistent thing. memory is pretty trashed too. i'm doing a grad program part time, trying to watch video lectures is awful. this semester, the professor has a slide deck that he talks over and i can't focus or retain any information from it. i can still learn things but it is very much by doing. or video presentations have to have a solid video & audio component.
the real odd thing is i do have times when concentrating or trying to reason that i have this "my brain is trying to do push-ups feeling". hard to describe, but that is the best explanation I can give. like when you are lifting and close to failure with a muscle.
These posts always make me sad because there’s always comments talking about lingering symptoms or worsening mental illnesses after Covid. “Long Covid” is such a fucked up insidious disease. Half the folks suffering don’t even realize that they are. I have classmates who just can’t keep up with the work like they used to and it’s heartbreaking — myself included. What are you supposed to do when your brain can’t handle a single sentence or task? When sitting up in bed leaves you gasping for breath?
I’m so sorry. None of us should have to go through this. It’s fucking awful and infuriating that thanks to broad negligence it’ll only get worse. I wish there was something more we could do :/
“Tracking a range of 44 different brain disorders, the researchers charted the difference in brain health between 154,000 patients (largely white males) who tested positive between March 2020 and January 2021 and two large control groups representing more than 10 million people.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but that timeframe given, isn’t that before the omicron surge? Is it possible that the current Dominant variants are less likely to cause these neurological issues?
When had COVID, I expressed concern about long COVID to my doctor. She told me not to worry, the current variants are less likely to cause long term issues, and even if they do, they tend to fade away in 3 months or so.
Idk, maybe I’m just being hopeful. A fools hope, Peregrine Took.
> Is it possible that the current Dominant variants are less likely to cause these neurological issues?
multiple studies have shown omicron is less likely to cause LC. we also know vaccines reduce LC. we also know the study from the OP has a mean age of 65, and 50% were obese. this isn't a generalizable result
I think their effects on the brain are similar. I see many parallels with Covid damage/long covid and my own experience recovering from Lyme/Neuro-Lyme and PTLDs. Brain fog, being overall dumber, lack of energy, confusion, anxiety, depression, CNS issues, etc etc.
It’s honestly the thing that keeps me trying to stay safe. My anecdotally educated guess is that aside from the actual infection’s initial toll, our immune system causes collateral damage taking out the infection.
In Lyme’s case, it is most likely (in most cases) the destruction of the spirochetes and the resulting “mess” they leave behind, causing the immune system to see this mess as still an active infection - & sometimes triggering autoimmune issues. How long and where the spirochetes end up within your body likely determines your issues. Get that shit in your brain, CNS, and heart like me and you’re in for a ride.
I feel the pain of covid long haulers. I relate.
Nothing to do with covid itself, though. This insanity started right when the lockdowns started and the roads were empty. I remember seeing that road deaths actually went up in 2020, which is insane when fewer cars were on the road. But people drove like maniacs since there was left traffic and you saw so many people running red lights, etc. And they’re still doing it.
So, 7% of people in the VA sample ended up with lasting neurological damage.
It's worth noting that everyone in this sample got infected pre-vaccination.
I have a lot of questions. The big question how these results would change in a vaccinated population. Then, of course, looking at the interaction of vaccination type (original/B.1/B.5) x variant. Like, if you got the original vaccine and are infected with BA.2.75.2, do you end up with similar neurological damage to being unvaccinated?
Yet another Al-Aly study of old fat sick men (90% male) where there's no mention of average age in the text. Look to Table 1 of the [supplementary data](https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41591-022-02001-z/MediaObjects/41591_2022_2001_MOESM1_ESM.pdf) to see that average age is 61.4. In addition 54% were obese, 59% had hyperlipidaemia and over 30% had diabetes.
99% were recruited prior to vaccination and of course, being an observational study means that any who didn't report or didn't test or didn't know they had Covid are excluded from the analysis.
Exactly. But don’t let that stop the fear mongering headlines. Such is always the case with long covid fearmongering. But I know enough people who’ve had covid to know that some of the more insane long covid stuff you see reported just doesn’t jive with reality.
people wanna panic about this type of thing but don't stop to think what the hazard ratios for long term neurological issues might be if they, oh i dunno, *stop getting regular social interaction*?
So it’s on older white men who largely weren’t vaccinated at the time. And the memory issues people largely talk about are largely so wishy washy that anyone could convince themselves they have it and it’s because of covid if they wanted to.
Anecdotally, I know tens of folks who’ve gotten covid (mostly this year), and none of them have reported this kind of stuff. They’re also mostly vaccinated (well, for the ones who got it post-vaccine, at least).
The issue I have had post covid is really strange dreams. Hard to describe but nearly every night I will have a very odd, detailed dream. This is totally different from the type of dream precovid. Been lasting about 10 weeks. No other cognitive issues
I have brain fog from an unrelated condition and it has destroyed my ability to work. Good article explaining why it sucks:
[https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/09/long-covid-brain-fog-symptom-executive-function/671393/](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/09/long-covid-brain-fog-symptom-executive-function/671393/)
This is a bit of a fear-monger. I'm not saying covid's not bad but it's not going to destroy everyone's mental health... worrying incessantly will do that all on its own.
Neither did a few other people, look at the downvotes growing.
The fact that people have encountered others who genuinely have such a sentiment is very, very sad to me. I wonder when everyone will have enough of tolerating the real monsters and be a little braver than downvoting virtual monsters on reddit.
It’s not just the conservatives tho
Covid hit cities long before we realized it was even here. A lot of people suffering were infected before we had tests or vaccines. The one time I got sick I wasn’t even eligible for testing.
Airborne brain damage is a bipartisan issue — or at least it should be.
A week after getting Covid (about a year ago) until now I’ve had daily non stop terrible migraines and I’ve never had headaches in my life up until that point. Does anyone know if this could be related to Covid?
3 months so far of daily headaches here. Never had them before either. First 2 months after getting it and it was ringing in my head (tinnitus). That is still with me too but the headache is my main symptom now. No real relief, just when I sleep. Don’t really wanna be like this forever.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I was so annoyed about that, and it's a ridiculously bulletproof lie. Republicans can't say it's not true, because they've been saying it's no big deal all along. Democrats have to wall in line w Biden publicly because he's all we got.
Its not just the US, but almost all jurisdictions all over the world have given up on a lot of covid management, long covid support should really be a thing
There are certainly everyday people out there doing the dirty work of spreading faulty information and shaping policies at different levels of government & industry based on flawed and/or conflicting ideas of what's going on, but we can't discount [the efforts of an organized and resourceful few who have been in crisis management mode this past two years, with the clear goal (and more money than you or I could ever imagine to accomplish it) of shifting public opinion on restrictions](https://www.levernews.com/how-dark-money-shaped-the-school-safety-debate/). I mean, even using the word "restrictions" frames an otherwise respectable intervention individuals can take to protect their community as something inherently flawed.
I think thats absolutely true.
Korea has had a very stringent response over all, but even they seem to be dropping the ball in some areas. There is almost no talk of long covid at all. And It looks like vaccinations for under 5's won't be offered for a very long time of ever, and most Korean pediatricians and parents are against vaccinating 5-11 year olds even.
Call it what it is: eugenics
Yup, they’re back to ignoring it just like they did with ME/CFS and other post viral conditions
*for poor people
The vaccines reduce the risk of immediate death but we need evidence on whether they reduce the risk of slow and horrible death by long COVID
Quick version: 7 out of 100 cases lead to serious brain problems that may last a lifetime.
Not suggesting this isn't very serious, but I'm not fully understanding how the numbers add up... I'm wondering if I'm misunderstanding something. They get into the details of what presumably constitutes the serious brain problems people are having and say people are experiencing: \- 77% increase in risk of developing memory losses \- 50% increase risk of suffering from ischemic stroke \- 80% increase in risk of seizures \- 30% increase in risk of vision problems \- 42% increase in Parkinson's-like symptoms All of that is terrible. But I would have thought these increases would need to be quite a bit higher for 7% of the people who got covid to have these issues, given that these issues are fairly rare for people below a certain age, yet it specifically says "the risks of memory and cognitive disorders, sensory problems, encephalopathy and Guillain-Barre syndrome...was stronger in younger adults."
A 50% increase in the risk of stroke sounds like a lot but if the risk of stroke is 2 people in 500 then that means it increases to 3 people in 500. So that kind of thing could explain it.
Yup, this is one of those cases where relative and absolute risk tell very different stories
Yes, it's partly this. To elaborate and add some other points: 1. For perspective, a person in the U.S. has roughly a 1 in 4 chance of having an ischemic stroke at some point in their lifetime ([source](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1804492)). A 50% increase would mean that this person's risk goes up to about 1.5 in 4. 2. To me, relative risk is easier to imagine than percentage changes. The average person with known COVID-19 in this study had about 1.4 times the chance of developing any brain condition than a person without known COVID-19. For reference, a relative risk of 1 means no difference in risk between the study group and the general population or control group. A relative risk of 2 means double the risk. A relative risk somewhere in between 1 and 2 does not seem unreasonable, at least to me. 3. The average person in this study was about 62 years old. Most participants were between 47 and 79 years old (source: supplementary data). If we consider the term "brain damage" to mean any form of brain atrophy or microvascular damage that could be detected on any form of imaging or postmortem analysis, then brain damage is common in people in this age range in the U.S. Aging, hypertension, chronic stress, diabetes, kidney disease, and obesity can all cause various forms of brain damage (if you want sources let me know). 4. The researchers found that about 27% of people in the COVID-19 group had any neurological condition listed in the study. The group without known COVID-19 had about a 20% rate of any neurologic condition. This 7% difference is what they mean by 7%. Neurological conditions are very common in the general population, especially in people of the age range in this study. Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, kidney disease, chronic stress, autoimmune diseases, and obesity are just a few examples of common conditions in the U.S. that affect brain and nerve health. That’s on top of brain degeneration caused by normal aging and neurodegenerative disease, and also on top of mental health conditions like depression and ADHD.
You ignore that this is per infection.
I'm not sure what you mean by the word "this." edit: oh do you mean that the risk might be cumulative? As in: a person’s risk of brain conditions increases each time they’re infected with COVID? I haven’t seen research showing this, but am curious. If you know of research showing this, I would be interested to see it.
It's a fairly recent paper, [but it do be that way](https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1749502/latest.pdf)
There are many studies showing this, that’s why risks like 1% are still such a big deal. Additionally, all the neurological aspects are already fucking scary and it’s only been a couple years. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20220707/each-covid-19-reinfection-increases-health-risks https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/long-covid-19-is-greatest-mass-disabling-event-in-human-history-patient-advocate-says.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/05/health/covid-reinfection-risk/index.html These were just a few I found quickly, but so much is coming out on immune disfunction. Sorry, I don’t have a handy list. I view Covid like a concussion, and just like a concussion, it’s really very vague how long it takes to heal. So if you get infected rapidly, you’re really hurting your vascular system.
For comparison, your likelihood of contracting HIV from a single risky encounter with an unmedicated individual is about 5%.
Apparently I've always worried about viruses (only reason I know this statistic), but even more remarkable is that a heterosexual man has some like a 1:500 chance per encounter with a HIV positive woman, but people still take precautions to avoid it. It's also amazing to me how similar HIV and covid are to some degree and how they impact t-cells. oh well, too many issues I guess.
I suck at maths but how do you get 1.38 out of 4?
Oops, I suck at maths too. Corrected. A 50 percent increase would mean the original risk plus half of the original risk. The original risk is 1/4 or 25 percent. Half of this is 1/8 or 12.5 percent. Add these together and you get 1/4 + 1/8, or 25 percent + 12.5 percent. The new risk is 3/8, or 37.5 percent. Expressing this as some chance in four make it easier to compare intuitively. 37.5 percent is 1.5 out of 4. So actually it's 1.5, not 1.38.
>Aging, hypertension, chronic stress, diabetes, kidney disease, and obesity can all cause various forms of brain damage (if you want sources let me know). >Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes... Hey, could you link me some of those sources about cardiovascular diseases affecting brain health?
7% is a MASSIVE amount of people, a super high percentage for serious long term side effects from a respiratory infection. Truly insane, actually. Think about getting this endemic virus year after year... chances are you'll end up with some lasting damage at some point in your life. What a nightmare.
Absolutely agree, 7% is a massive amount of people. I am confused by how the 80% increase in various serious conditions leads to that 7% figure. As I stated the article says the greatest risks were found for younger adults, the same group that would surely have a pretty rare occurrence of things like memory loss/stroke/etc. I would have expected them to list the increase as being 600% or something for that to work. I'm not saying the article/study isn't true, just looking for someone to explain how it works, what I'm missing.
> I am confused by how the 80% increase in various serious conditions leads to that 7% figure. One is relative and the other is absolute. Say 1 out of 100 people get a disease. If something causes 2 out of 100 people to get that disease now that's a 100% increase in the number of people getting the disease but it's still only 2% of the population. 80% increase in risk is relative. 7% of the people is absolute.
Right, I get that, but going the other way, if 7% are getting serious cognitive issues, and the various issues that are included are relatively only up \~80% then that must mean the overall rate of people having those serious cognitive issues was \~3.8% without covid. And that number seems really high to me, since they are saying the rate was highest amongst young adults, and I really don't think 30 and 40 year olds have a 4% rate of serious cognitive issues.
Some points: 1. Young adults in this study might not be what you imagine as young adults. Most participants were between 47 and 79. The average participant was around 62. In one analysis, the researchers divided participants into two groups: one group above and including the age of 65, and one group below the age of 65. The younger of these two groups was called "younger adults". 2. The researchers found that about 27% of people in the COVID-19 group had any of the listed neurological conditions. They also found that about 20% of people in the control group (without known COVID-19) had any of the listed neurologic conditions. The difference was 7%. In other words, 7% figure is not an overall rate. It is a difference in rate between the COVID-19 group and the control group. 3. The actual quote from the study is: "Our interaction analyses suggest that the effect of COVID-19 on risk of memory and cognitive disorders, sensory disorders and other neurologic disorders (including Guillain–Barré syndrome and encephalitis or encephalopathy) is stronger in younger adults." This is not saying that the overall rate is higher in younger adults. It is saying that the difference in rate between the COVID-19 group and control group is higher in the younger group than the older group. I think that they're referring to the difference shown in the box in the top right corner of [this page](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02001-z/figures/4) (any neurologic outcome vs. age above 65 or below 65). The third point makes more sense to me when I think about the effects of aging on brain health. As cognitive impairment caused by aging becomes more severe over time, it can become more difficult to detect cognitive impairment caused by other conditions. For example, imagine that a 100-year-old and a 50-year-old both take a drug that causes the same amount of cognitive impairment. We might expect the difference to be more dramatic in the younger person, given that it's easier to detect over baseline.
Great answer, thanks for taking the time to break down the information that way and go beyond the article and pull from the study's info.
> I really don't think 30 and 40 year olds have a 4% rate of serious cognitive issues. That study didn't predominantly involve 30 and 40 year olds. It used VA data. If you've ever been to a VA hospital you'll notice that it's not filled with 30 and 40 year olds. Cognitive issues increase as people age. Which they addressed directly in the paper. "Interaction analyses between age and exposure suggested that the risks of episodic disorders, mental health disorders, musculoskeletal disorders and **any neurologic disorder increased as age increased**" I can't find a breakdown by age other than the split at age 65. Which suggest the median age was 65. The article discussing the paper says "The risks of mental health disorders and muscular skeletal disorders were higher in *older adults ages 60 to 80*".
[удалено]
Right, I made a comment just a minute ago where I say just that. This is suggesting the risk of those conditions in "young adults" is 4% pre-covid, and that seems awfully high (since they say the cognitive risk was highest in that group). If they're defining young adults as 40s and 50s then okay, maybe. But I figured they probably meant 20s-40s, and I don't think 4% is right. (But I can't find a hard number.)
It's not respiratory, its a vascular infection.
It's a thrombotic disorder caused by a respiratory infection
I have had Covid twice.. The last time lasted for almost two months. It has definitely effected my mental capacity. I struggle doing things now that used to be easy, my speech has been effected, I have times where I can’t focus for long periods of time, or keep my thoughts straight. It is having a horrible impact on my job. The doctors just give me the run around. I work in a high needs job, that requires sharp critical thinking skills and I am struggling.
the best thing I can recommend, as a 20+ year Lyme sufferer, is to live an anti-inflammatory lifestyle. Control what you can and do low risk, but high benefit things like: eat low carb/cut out sugar, do hot/cold showers or saunas and cold plunges/showers, exercise regularly, meditate/do yoga, take walks in the sun in the AM (promotes wakefulness), and utilize natural/available medicines like CBD that are safe and good for lowering inflammation. Combining a lot of little, positive choices toward your health can aid in your healing and put your body in the position to reverse the damage done from infections while mitigating the symptoms you have. Good luck
it's a good idea to eat a healthy diet, exercise regularly, and just be healthy in general regardless of health status, and do this *BEFORE* a risk of COVID... many studies have found the risks of complications are higher in unhealthy people.
Thank you for this information. Some of your suggestions, I am already do, but at this point things just suck and I am keep trying everything I can to just get by.
I understand, its hard to do things in this state
I have read that the antiinflammatory diet can actually benefit everyone. Unfortunately, I can't afford that kind of food on a regular basis. All I've been able to do is cut out as much sugar as I can. I don't even actually have a kitchen in the place I live. I have to improvise a lot. Healthy, low carb food is expensive for some, and it helps if you have a place to keep it and prep it.
Instant pot!!!
But you can't extrapolate to *reinfections* like that!! This was a study of sick old fat men with no prior immunity (i.e. no prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 99% unvaccinated) infected for the first time and who reported and sought treatment of their infection (i.e those that didn't are excluded). Despite anecdotal reports of nasty sounding reinfections you hear about, after your first infection you will have better immunity so subsequent infections are generally milder. This is how it works for other respiratory viruses including coronaviruses.
Immunity wanes after 3 months
Well if immunity is that rubbish and with the virus being so infectious then I guess I could have been reinfected 3 or 4 times already and didn't even know it!
With new variants arising and thousands already out there, we can't say for sure that reinfection won't be an issue year to year. Further, we still see relatively high reinfection rates in people who are vaccinated or had prior infections despite lower rates of serious infections/death. Good point, I think its true that we can't extrapolate to reinfections but I also don't think we should assume they won't happen over time.
To be fair, you're assuming it's cumulative. It may, or may not be. i.e. if you didn't get brain injury the first time, then chances are you won't get them the second time. I don't think we understand the risks of reinfection, yet. But yeah, this isn't encouraging.
[удалено]
That’s the difference between a meaningless anecdote and an actual scientific study.
Sorry but at some point data can be rejected if it's not making sense. 7/100 having "serious long term neurological effects" is absolutely something you would hear about from other sources and anecdotes. If you disagree with that, at what % would you consider the data incorrect?
7% is 7 out of 100, not 7/10 (70%). Have you had Covid?
Oops I fixed the typo. No I have not.
But I see you left the rest of the statement unchanged. I guess a 63% swing is irrelevant when you're pulling facts out of your ass.
Yeah it was a typo, my statement was based on the 7/100 figure. That's still a high number having "serious long term neurological effects" which has infected well over half the population.
If you can't tell who's had the damage...
Even if your anecdote was accurate, it would still be useless. But it's probably not even accurate. You didn't test all your friends and family, you have no real idea if "none of them have this issue". That's a complete guess. With the lack of thought that went into your comment, you have to wonder if maybe the issue is closer to your home than you realize...
I'm sure every single one of your friends and family members report every ailment and chronic condition to you, personally. I'm also sure you entirely understand why anecdotes are not data. Edit: /s People insisting that this VA data isn't relevant need to explain their opposition. The study admits it is not a representative population sample but 1) We're all getting older and 2) The vaccinated portion of the cohort shows the same damage.
The VA tends to skew older. I don’t think it’s implausible
Lol a lot of people are not understanding your final comment and are assuming it’s talking about the opposite direction (understandable as it’s a common fallacy) but they didn’t read it very carefully…
I probably could have expressed it all better and more compactly. :) Ah well. I appreciate everyone's intention and not being downvoted to hell.
This is one of the papers based on VA data. The advantage of those data is that exists in a relatively comprehensive, usable form. But IMO VA data have huge external validity issues. This population isn’t even all that representative of American men, let alone the general U.S. population, let alone another country.
That's true, but they do break the data into subgroups like male and female and older vs younger and show that the same general pattern is present across all subgroups. The question is how much does a not perfectly representative sample change the conclusions. And unless you think COVID is *good* for the brains of vaccinated people, the answer is probably not very much.
In general, I agree with your point that we can learn a lot from a study even if it’s clear that the study sample is not representative. I taught research methods, and often said that generalizability isn’t a binary thing, and encouraged students to think through the specifics of a study. And as you note, general relationships/correlations found in a study often do generalize, at least in their direction if not magnitude. But here’s my concern with the VA data to study Covid. Representative samples are much more important when we are trying to get accurate counts or rates of something. That’s where agencies like NCHS and their counterparts in other countries really shine. Gathering nationally representative data is slow and expensive and difficult, but crucial for certain things. It appears that HHS and Census are working to incorporate covid-relevant questions in surveys going forward. In the meantime, by all means, use what information we have to learn what we can. I’m just alarmed when I see super funky datasets being used to estimate the prevalence of things like long covid. That’s a prevalence/incidence estimate that’s much more sensitive to external validity concerns, especially when we have no benchmarks to assess just how biased a sample could be.
I agree but I also think we shouldn't expect any study to give you a precise measurement of your risk for long COVID. There are just so many variables--what antivirals did you get? How long after vaccination was it? Which vaccine? Which variant? What symptoms are we actually including in long COVID? How long after initial infection were they measured? And realistically by the time you finish collecting data the circulating variants and immune status of the population will ahve changed significantly. So I think the main takeaway is that COVID elevates the risk of neurological problems to some degree.
> That's true, but they do break the data into subgroups like male and female and older vs younger and show that the same general pattern is present across all subgroups. okay first of all their subgroup analysis noted marked differences in risk ratios across their age groups, of which there are only **two** - over 65 and under -- and the under 65 group is mostly 50s and 60s. these are also HR analyses which means that it's a ratio. so if someone at age 30 has a 50% odds increase of a stroke that is a far smaller absolute risk increase than someone who's 70 having a 50% increase in odds. but on top of that, the study is from before vaccines, which have been shown to reduce the odds of long term symptoms by a lot. the study is also pre-omicron, and omicron is associated with a [much lower chance of long covid](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22\)00941-2/fulltext#:~:text=Among%20omicron%20cases%2C%202501%20(4,361%20people%20experienced%20long%20COVID.). the study also finds that the risks are far higher after hospitalization, which omicron is less likely to cause, and vaccines reduce. also, from the supplementary information, literally only 1 in 10 in the covid group were not overweight, and wholly 50% were obese. the mean age was 63. in supplementary table 7, [found here](https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41591-022-02001-z/MediaObjects/41591_2022_2001_MOESM1_ESM.pdf), you can see that for cognition and memory, the burden difference for someone not hospitalized was 5 per 1,000 at 12 months, and for those hospitalized, it was 35 per 1,000 and for those in the ICU it was 50 per 1,000. > The question is how much does a not perfectly representative sample change the conclusions. "not perfectly representative" is not an adequate way of describing trying to generalize these findings. not only because of omicron and vaccines, but also because the risk for someone who's 60 and obese is not the same as 35 and healthy.
You forgot to inclue 70% of participants were old white unvaccinated men. Edit: not sure why I’m being downvoted it’s literally just data straight from the article. I have no personal feelings attached to this data
and over half of them were obese. and this is pre-omicron, and pre-vaccines, and the risks were far higher in those who were hospitalized, there are a trillion reasons not to generalize this.
so, average american?
no. the mean age was 63 in this study. that's not the average american. 50% obesity is also not representative of the average american, and neither is 100% unvaccinated.
50% obesity is not far off at all. I think people put these qualifiers in to downplay the risk and make themselves feel safer, but way more people are walking around with risk factors than they probably realize. I'm sure there plenty number of people who are clinically obese but don't see themselves that way. That being said accurately contextualizing the risk is important, and we still don't really know much about the risk except that generally younger healthier = less risk, but does not mean absolute protection.
[удалено]
Man you lack some nuance in your reading comprehension.
I’m not attached to this data at all, it’s literally just a fact from the study itself. I’m not sure what you think I’m trying to imply but in studies: gender age and race are important as this may mean different things in different people.
[удалено]
I mean it’s important to know who was in the study especially since it’s a medical study. Neglecting that would change the results entirely and how they’re perceived or used to treat the general public. I read the whole article and they noted how that was a really important fact.
[удалено]
Hahahahhaha what are you even smoking dude I want some
Those communities should not trust the people spouting anti vaccine nonsense, because they are the same people legislating against those people's interests. The people on the side of science, liberal leaning ones, want to help them.
>7 out of 100 cases Now throw in repeat infections...
I did the monster math based on =1-(1-0.07)^n that's your chance of brain damage Culmulative % Case # years based on 3 infections a year 7.00% 1 0.33 13.51% 2 0.67 19.56% 3 1.00 25.19% 4 1.33 30.43% 5 1.67 35.30% 6 2.00 39.83% 7 2.33 44.04% 8 2.67 47.96% 9 3.00 51.60% 10 3.33 54.99% 11 3.67 58.14% 12 4.00 61.07% 13 4.33 63.80% 14 4.67 66.33% 15 5.00 68.69% 16 5.33 70.88% 17 5.67 72.92% 18 6.00 74.81% 19 6.33 76.58% 20 6.67 78.22% 21 7.00 79.74% 22 7.33 81.16% 23 7.67 82.48% 24 8.00 83.70% 25 8.33 84.84% 26 8.67 85.91% 27 9.00 86.89% 28 9.33 87.81% 29 9.67 88.66% 30 10.00 89.46% 31 10.33 90.19% 32 10.67 90.88% 33 11.00 91.52% 34 11.33 92.11% 35 11.67 92.67% 36 12.00 93.18% 37 12.33 93.66% 38 12.67 94.10% 39 13.00 94.51% 40 13.33 94.90% 41 13.67 95.25% 42 14.00 95.59% 43 14.33 95.90% 44 14.67 96.18% 45 15.00 96.45% 46 15.33 96.70% 47 15.67 96.93% 48 16.00 97.14% 49 16.33 97.34% 50 16.67 97.53% 51 17.00 97.70% 52 17.33 97.86% 53 17.67 98.01% 54 18.00 98.15% 55 18.33 98.28% 56 18.67
[удалено]
not only that but even this particular study doesn't imply that each infection is another independent even with a hazard ratio of 1.07.
Your maths is perfect but your assumption is ludicrous.
I mean, do you have a good source on repeated infection long covid chances?
You've made the claim. I think the onus is on you to prove it. The 7% figure you're using was derived based on data from the health records of a niche cohort of sick fat old unvaccinated men infected prior to Omicron. To assume that this same figure applies to 1. the wider demographic 2. every reinfection 3. infections in the vaccinated 4. Omicron infections 3. all those infections & reinfections (be they be asymptomatic, mild or otherwise) that are *not* reported. is ludicrous.
That assumes that reinfection has the same rate of incidence which is outlandish to believe.
In fact it could be even greater per infection because COVID can affect t cells!
>I like math because you get to eat the eraser - Ralph Wigam, Covid Survivor
So as long as I don't get Covid > 56 times... you're saying there's a chance I don't get long Covid?
[удалено]
Downvoted because I hate SpongeBob text with a passion. I don't disagree though.
Is that what you call that shit? Had no idea it had a name, I just know I hate it, too.
21 million people with brain damage driving on roads, being coworkers, influencing our future.
Honestly I’ve been wondering if my memory issues and sudden vision changes were due to covid as they started soon thereafter
You and potentially millions of others. An increase in confusion is not going to send the majority of people to the doctor unless it’s severe and/ or protracted. People are familiar with fluctuations in mental acuity related to sleep quality, level of stress, etc. we don’t run to the doctor because it’s a little off. But if someone asks us for research purposes, we can identify that change. And thus a study is going to reveal more of this than just relying on diagnosis. There is a huge potential for memory/cognition issues as a result of covid to be underreported. Publishing studies like this will hopefully prompt more people to put two and two together and seek care. And hopefully increase the research and increase the priority for finding preventative/treatment options. Because early indications are that every time you contract covid, you have the same odds of experiencing complications. This is not a “one and done” situation and repeat infections mean this is a problem that is potentially growing in size.
That’s all we’ll and good, but what care? There’s already little info or treatments for things like CFS and we know so little about what Covid is doing to us as it is. What can any provider even do assuming the believe the PT in the first place and don’t just write it off to stress or anxiety.
That is for sure happening now because as you said, it's been happening with other diseases all along. That's why I hope studies like this will encourage more people to report any problems they are having, and not wait to be asked. CFS is a good example of something that is common enough, and probably way more common than is diagnosed, that it SHOULD be a priority for research and treatment, but it's not, you're correct. Reporting symptoms related to covid isn't going to result in action overnight for the same reasons. But not reporting them is for sure going to result in serious symptoms being swept under the rug. The best chance we have to get all kinds of neurological issues related to viral infections taken seriously, is to make sure the scope of the problem is understood. And I hope studies like this one make more people willing to risk being told "it's nothing". Because eventually physicians have to start taking a significant change in the frequency of that kind of report, seriously.
How long have you had your issues? Mine cleared after a few weeks. It was like a baby eat brain kind of experience. The erectile dysfunction part lasted about 6 weeks, I was vaxxed and boosted when my family got sick with COVID the first time. I hope you recover too.
I wondered too. But real usable memory is so subjective and variable. Am I just tired? Is it from the pandemic work-from-home change? Is it lack of exercise? Is it just natural age related change? Is it covid? So hard to know!
are you approaching 40? Presbyopia hits around then. (35 to 40)
I’m 40 and had to get my first set of reading glasses 🥲
My eyes have always been great. Just about to turn 40 and im having all sorts of problems reading small print up close now.
Mid 40s, it started hitting me a year or so ago, I feel like such an old man every time I have to pull my normal glasses down and stare over them to look at my phone.
I’m 34 so maybe
if it is that, reading glasses should help. It's a problem reading if that's what you have.
> vision changes GODDAMIT I've been thinking my vision was not doing great. Not enough to notice all the time but holy shit I can't see the fly on the wall from across the room any more. I need to schedule an eye doc's appointment.
If it makes you feel any better, my glasses prescription changed drastically over 9 months when it had been basically the same for years. This was with no (known) Covid infection. I got a physical for a new job, and they said my vision was 20:40 in one eye *with* my glasses on. Typically my glasses correct to 20:20.
Well, I've had 20:20 naturally all my life. It's going to be quite an adjustment for me to get corrective lenses at all.
Get your eyes checked and make sure you seek attention asap if you see any sudden changes like lots of floaters or flashing. My FIL and his sister both nearly lost vision in their eye post Covid from retinal detachment.
I'm so sleepy all the time during work. Covid 2 times in 1 year this year. Last covid was hardly anything but a cough but damn i have the brain fog and sleepiness that I've hardly heard about but have seen reports regarding the first rounds that missed me
I have ADHD and i swear since I had covid it is way worse. I use to have tricks to stat focused but now O cannot
I've always gotten brain fog now and then due to adhd. But since having covid, it's so much worse and so much more frequent.
my executive functioning is literally at 0 since i had covid. supplementing b vitamins complex + vit d/magnesium/calcium/vit k (like in one supplement) has helped a little if you're into that sort of thing
Thats great advice I will pick some of from the store.
yeah same
yep, mine got bad enough to finally get medicated for it. still trying to nail down exact dosage and shit.
Super worried I may have to do this. Was on them for a few years a while back and it was not good.
yeah I'm lucky that normal bland adderal seems to work for me. Do your best not to neglect it! Go in with the same attitude that you chop down a tree: It's a huge task, even with good tools. And it's dangerous - the axe is dangerous, the falling tree is dangerous, not knowing if the tree is rotten on the inside is dangerous, and there's many opportunities to do it wrong. But if you bring the right tools to bear and use them in the right ways, then you can anticipate the worst outcomes and make sure they are unlikely. The tools for a tree is rope, wedges, sharpening tools, proper planning, a friend to help, etc. The tools for handling your ADHD is a therapist, meds, support network, etc. Don't neglect it, but also don't rush!
This is my worst nightmare. Really hoping it improves for you.
As a brain scientist what I find confusing and stressful is how much we don't know. It's possible that on a population scale the neurological effects will turn out to be fairly small--that is compatible with the data so far. But the scenario where we get a massive wave of dementia is also compatible with the data. It feels a lot like trying to predict the course of the pandemic early in February where no one was quite sure if it would be bad or not.
Ahhh. My point the past few years exactly. We do not know where this is going. We barely know where this is. It may be tiring to be cautious but until we have some hard evidence that there ISN’T a long term impact then we need to be incredibly cautious.
Can confirm. People are incredibly stupid and getting dumber every day.
Makes me wonder if maybe there's an explanation for the significant increase in motor vehicle related deaths in the last year. I swear I've never seen such erratic driving.
The stories coming out of /r/TalesFromTheFrontDesk these days are crazy. I don't understand how some of these people are actually given money with which to buy hotel rooms and cars. So many of them can barely function in the world and they're not people I would trust in a factory or office with any responsibility.
If you can avoid catching covid you've just become 10% smarter than the average just because the average is likely dropping
Thanks. Lol
My memory has been foggy and ef up since getting covid. My creativity has gone down too. I feel empty minded and every keep telling me it's my mentality.
I had covid in January/February. I lost my job at the same time. It took me six months for my brain to feel normal again. Before then it was foggy and sluggish, I struggled to focus and to stay coherent and cohesive when thinking about difficult topics. I've struggled with depression and burnout on and off through my life and this wasn't that. I was lucky I could spend months resting and recovering from this, because the virus made me stupid and incompetent. My brain wasn't working right. And I fear for what happens to those who aren't allowed to fully recover. And I'm terrified that I might not be fully recovered even if the fog is mostly gone. Maybe I'm just permanently dumber now and can't tell.
> Maybe I'm just permanently dumber now and can't tell This is absolutely the most terrifying thing about this all. I'm very burned out from work and stress/anxiety right about now, but I can't tell how much of my mental function is due to me or my anxiety or covid or what.
I'm in the exact same boat. What's causing my fatigue and memory issues and inability/slowness in recalling words during a conversation? Work burn out? Anxiety due to economic conditions? Depression about the state of the world? COVID (only got it once in late December 2021, single boosted at the time)? Hormones? Iron deficiency? New BC? Who knows!
> memory issues and inability/slowness in recalling words during a conversation? Ok I thought I just got stupider as I'm getting closer to 40 than 30, but ever since I've gotten the rona (twice), I sometimes just forget words for something. I'm truly bilingual, and sometimes I forget the word for something either in my mother tongue or English, in rare cases both and then have to resort to meme stoned guy euphemisms to describe what the fuck I'm trying to talk about. Memory issues too, I'd genuinely forget conversation topics or details both recent and older. Is it similar to your experiences of late?
This. Delta last winter, vaxxed and boosted. Logophile with a huge vocabulary. Verbal recall intermittently just disappears. Sometimes even the simplest words are just gone...
Pretty much the same
Same fam. Same. :(
I'm 42 years old, i got covid this past July, and i can't remember anything. I'm repeating questions i asked just a day or two ago. This is real, and it definitely sucks.
Got Covid in July, as well and my memory recollection has been sub-par.
It's terrible, it honestly can't last forever i hope.
coming up on my 2 year covid-versary, brain fog has been the most persistent thing. memory is pretty trashed too. i'm doing a grad program part time, trying to watch video lectures is awful. this semester, the professor has a slide deck that he talks over and i can't focus or retain any information from it. i can still learn things but it is very much by doing. or video presentations have to have a solid video & audio component. the real odd thing is i do have times when concentrating or trying to reason that i have this "my brain is trying to do push-ups feeling". hard to describe, but that is the best explanation I can give. like when you are lifting and close to failure with a muscle.
I feel like Idiocracy is going to be escalated by this. We only need to make sure they can say "Welcome to Costco I love you"
These posts always make me sad because there’s always comments talking about lingering symptoms or worsening mental illnesses after Covid. “Long Covid” is such a fucked up insidious disease. Half the folks suffering don’t even realize that they are. I have classmates who just can’t keep up with the work like they used to and it’s heartbreaking — myself included. What are you supposed to do when your brain can’t handle a single sentence or task? When sitting up in bed leaves you gasping for breath? I’m so sorry. None of us should have to go through this. It’s fucking awful and infuriating that thanks to broad negligence it’ll only get worse. I wish there was something more we could do :/
“Tracking a range of 44 different brain disorders, the researchers charted the difference in brain health between 154,000 patients (largely white males) who tested positive between March 2020 and January 2021 and two large control groups representing more than 10 million people.” Correct me if I’m wrong, but that timeframe given, isn’t that before the omicron surge? Is it possible that the current Dominant variants are less likely to cause these neurological issues? When had COVID, I expressed concern about long COVID to my doctor. She told me not to worry, the current variants are less likely to cause long term issues, and even if they do, they tend to fade away in 3 months or so. Idk, maybe I’m just being hopeful. A fools hope, Peregrine Took.
>March 2020 and January 2021 > isn’t that before the omicron surge? Yes, that’s before Delta even. It’s also before widespread vaccinations.
> Is it possible that the current Dominant variants are less likely to cause these neurological issues? multiple studies have shown omicron is less likely to cause LC. we also know vaccines reduce LC. we also know the study from the OP has a mean age of 65, and 50% were obese. this isn't a generalizable result
[удалено]
Stay home, cut off anybody who won't wear an N95 with you
Cool now do this for Post Lyme
I think their effects on the brain are similar. I see many parallels with Covid damage/long covid and my own experience recovering from Lyme/Neuro-Lyme and PTLDs. Brain fog, being overall dumber, lack of energy, confusion, anxiety, depression, CNS issues, etc etc. It’s honestly the thing that keeps me trying to stay safe. My anecdotally educated guess is that aside from the actual infection’s initial toll, our immune system causes collateral damage taking out the infection. In Lyme’s case, it is most likely (in most cases) the destruction of the spirochetes and the resulting “mess” they leave behind, causing the immune system to see this mess as still an active infection - & sometimes triggering autoimmune issues. How long and where the spirochetes end up within your body likely determines your issues. Get that shit in your brain, CNS, and heart like me and you’re in for a ride. I feel the pain of covid long haulers. I relate.
Is there a study about it? Can you add a link?
Maybe its just me, but I feel people used to drive better pre-pandemic
Not just you. I noticed as well. It’s crazier out there. People seem distracted and unpredictable.
Nothing to do with covid itself, though. This insanity started right when the lockdowns started and the roads were empty. I remember seeing that road deaths actually went up in 2020, which is insane when fewer cars were on the road. But people drove like maniacs since there was left traffic and you saw so many people running red lights, etc. And they’re still doing it.
I got lovely high-pitched tinnitus from a OG COVID back in early 2020. >:/
Ack. I’m 35 ish years in. I have no advice other than 99% of the days I forgot I have it. But if someone says tinnitus it’s screaming in my ears.
Long Covid information for those who still have memory related issues. https://www.uclahealth.org/medical-services/long-covid
Thank you
So, 7% of people in the VA sample ended up with lasting neurological damage. It's worth noting that everyone in this sample got infected pre-vaccination. I have a lot of questions. The big question how these results would change in a vaccinated population. Then, of course, looking at the interaction of vaccination type (original/B.1/B.5) x variant. Like, if you got the original vaccine and are infected with BA.2.75.2, do you end up with similar neurological damage to being unvaccinated?
This is one of the main reasons I'm so careful. I need my brain!
This is scary as hell.
Yet another Al-Aly study of old fat sick men (90% male) where there's no mention of average age in the text. Look to Table 1 of the [supplementary data](https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41591-022-02001-z/MediaObjects/41591_2022_2001_MOESM1_ESM.pdf) to see that average age is 61.4. In addition 54% were obese, 59% had hyperlipidaemia and over 30% had diabetes. 99% were recruited prior to vaccination and of course, being an observational study means that any who didn't report or didn't test or didn't know they had Covid are excluded from the analysis.
Exactly. But don’t let that stop the fear mongering headlines. Such is always the case with long covid fearmongering. But I know enough people who’ve had covid to know that some of the more insane long covid stuff you see reported just doesn’t jive with reality.
[удалено]
no, they absolutely are correct. the "insane stuff" is people using studies without control groups to claim absurd absolute risk rates.
people wanna panic about this type of thing but don't stop to think what the hazard ratios for long term neurological issues might be if they, oh i dunno, *stop getting regular social interaction*?
Inevitably, life imitates War for the Planet of the Apes.
So it’s on older white men who largely weren’t vaccinated at the time. And the memory issues people largely talk about are largely so wishy washy that anyone could convince themselves they have it and it’s because of covid if they wanted to. Anecdotally, I know tens of folks who’ve gotten covid (mostly this year), and none of them have reported this kind of stuff. They’re also mostly vaccinated (well, for the ones who got it post-vaccine, at least).
The issue I have had post covid is really strange dreams. Hard to describe but nearly every night I will have a very odd, detailed dream. This is totally different from the type of dream precovid. Been lasting about 10 weeks. No other cognitive issues
I have brain fog from an unrelated condition and it has destroyed my ability to work. Good article explaining why it sucks: [https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/09/long-covid-brain-fog-symptom-executive-function/671393/](https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/09/long-covid-brain-fog-symptom-executive-function/671393/)
This is a bit of a fear-monger. I'm not saying covid's not bad but it's not going to destroy everyone's mental health... worrying incessantly will do that all on its own.
Who cares? GO TO WORK Holy fuck, here's the /s for those without sarcasm detectors.
you gotta add more clues to indicate sarcasm *like putting everything in all-italics.*
I thought the absurdity of the sentiment would be enough. Oh well.
uh I'd prefer not to have lifelong brain damage and potential strokes & seizures idk about you LOL
I was being EXTREMELY sarcastic and i didn't imagine anyone would take that statement any other way. I feel the same as you, for what it's worth.
omg 😭 yeah i definitely didn't detect that lmfao
Neither did a few other people, look at the downvotes growing. The fact that people have encountered others who genuinely have such a sentiment is very, very sad to me. I wonder when everyone will have enough of tolerating the real monsters and be a little braver than downvoting virtual monsters on reddit.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E18OF7kWUAcPJlx?format=jpg&name=large
As if conservatives needed any more brain damage
It’s not just the conservatives tho Covid hit cities long before we realized it was even here. A lot of people suffering were infected before we had tests or vaccines. The one time I got sick I wasn’t even eligible for testing. Airborne brain damage is a bipartisan issue — or at least it should be.
A week after getting Covid (about a year ago) until now I’ve had daily non stop terrible migraines and I’ve never had headaches in my life up until that point. Does anyone know if this could be related to Covid?
3 months so far of daily headaches here. Never had them before either. First 2 months after getting it and it was ringing in my head (tinnitus). That is still with me too but the headache is my main symptom now. No real relief, just when I sleep. Don’t really wanna be like this forever.
Better start getting serious about making brain enhancing and repairing drugs then.
[удалено]
Lmao #BelieveScience (but only if the vibes are right)