aTm2004 said:

---

COVID's long-term issues are still a small percentage of the overall cases. That's what you're not grasping. You're focusing on the exceptions, and you can't live like that.

---

aTm2004 said:

---

Here's the actual CDC data...
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics

Main thing to take from it:
Age 65+ account for 13.8% of cases, but 80.6% of deaths
50-64 account for 20.4% of cases and 14.8% of deaths
18-49 account for 53.8% of cases and 4.6% of deaths
0-17 account for 12.1% of cases and 0.1% of deaths

---

94chem said:

---

...and seeing that fully masked chamber of democrats sitting 10 feet apart, even though they are all vaccinated, sent the wrong message. But beyond that, forget about "messaging." What we need more of is TRUTH. The truth is that if you get your darned shot, you can have your life back. Why can't spineless leaders simply tell the truth?

---

bay fan said:

---

aTm2004 said:

---

Fitch said:

---

I've got an Aunt who is a long hauler and an uncle had to have monoclonal antibody treatment. Lots of family friends who spent days sick and at least two that progressed to pneumonia and lost 10+ lbs while their kids shrugged it off in a few days with nothing but a runny nose.

Said this on another thread but a doctor friend / old lady from A&M days knows a dozen people dead, two in their 30's and a 23 y/o nurse. In no way is that the common outcome or even remotely likely, but the odds aren't zero either.

Another friend is a rheumatologist and acknowledged they're seeing "a ton of people every week" with post covid issues presenting in every flavor under the sun months after recovering.

---

You're taking to people with jaded views on it. They see the worse of it and assume it's that way for everyone, which it's not. They're not seeing or telling you about the countless others who had no or minimal issues and no long term effects. It reminds me of a conversation I had with a retired LEO who told me he had to learn early in his career to turn it off when he was off shift. When I asked him what he meant, he told me that he dealt with some of the worst people in the world, and he had to step out of his LEO mindset while he was off the job so he didn't see every guy as an alcoholic husband who abuses his wife and kids, didn't see every single mother as someone who allows their boyfriend to molest her daughter because he funds her drug habit, etc. He said he could remember in vivid detail the worst cases he was involved in but very few of the positive interactions he had with the public. I think we're seeing something similar from the medical community.

The point is, when all you see is the bad you forget about the good, which vastly outnumbers the bad.

---

That's funny. Doctors direct experience equates to "jaded" views because in your LACK of experience they are wrong? Okay, good to get that straight, best to pretend these problems don't exist by persistently saying so as nobody experiencing long term effect has sought out your advice.

---

Quote:

---

In this study, we use a high dimensional approach to identify the spectrum of clinical abnormalities (incident diagnoses, incident medication use, and incident laboratory abnormalities) experienced by COVID19 survivors beyond the first 30 days of illness. The results suggest that beyond the first 30 days of illness, people with COVID-19 are at higher risk of death, health care resource utilization, and exhibit a broad array of incident pulmonary and extrapulmonary clinical manifestations including nervous system and neurocognitive disorders, mental health disorders, metabolic disorders, cardiovascular disorders, gastrointestinal disorders, and signs and symptoms related to poor general wellbeing including malaise, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, and anemia. Increased risk of incident use of several medication classes was also observed including pain medications (opioids and non-opioids), antidepressants, anxiolytics, antihypertensives, antihyperlipidemics, oral hypoglycemics, insulin, and other medication classes. Our analyses of pre-specified outcomes complement the high dimensional approach to identify specific post-acute sequalae with greater diagnostic resolution and reveal two key findings: a) the risk and associated burden of post-acute sequalae is evident even among those whose acute disease was not severe enough to necessitate hospitalization the segment that represents the majority of people with COVID-19, and b) the risk and associated burden increases across the severity spectrum of the acute COVID-19 infection (non-hospitalized, hospitalized, admitted to intensive care). Our comparative approach to examine post-acute sequalae in those hospitalized with COVID-19 vs. seasonal influenza (using a high dimensional approach and through examination of pre-specified outcomes) suggests substantially higher burden of a broad array of post-acute sequelae in those hospitalized with COVID-19 vs. seasonal influenza providing differentiating features of post-COVID-19 (both in magnitude of risk and breadth of organ involvement) from a post-influenza viral syndrome. The constellation of evidence suggests that 30-day survivors of COVID-19 exhibited increased risk of death and health resource utilization, and substantial burden of health loss (spanning pulmonary and several extrapulmonary organ systems) and highlights the need for a holistic and integrated multidisciplinary long-term care of COVID-19 survivors.

Beyond the first 30 days of illness, COVID-19 survivors had increased risk of death (HR 1.59 (1.46. 1.73)). We also estimated the adjusted excess burden due to COVID-19 per 1000 persons at 6-months based on the difference of estimated incidence rate between COVID-19 and all users of VHA. The excess death was estimated at 8.39 (7.09. 9.58) per 1000 COVID-19 patients at 6-months. Those with COVID-19 had a higher risk of outpatient care encounter (HR 1.20 (1.19, 1.21); excess burden 33.22 (30.89, 35.58) and at a greater frequency (0.47 (0.44, 0.49) additional encounter every 30 days) (Extended data table 2b and c).

At six months following a COVID-19 infection that did not result in a hospitalization in the first 30-days, excess burden of respiratory conditions was most common and included respiratory signs and symptoms (28.51 (26.40, 30.50) per 1000 COVID-19 patients at 6-months), respiratory failure, insufficiency, arrest (3.37 (2.71, 3.92)), and lower respiratory disease (4.67 (3.96, 5.28)). There was also evidence of high burden of incident use of bronchodilators (22.23 (20.68, 23.67)), antitussives and expectorants (12.83 (11.61, 13.95)), anti-asthmatics (8.87 (7.65, 9.97)), and glucocorticoids (7.65 (5.67, 9.50)).

The results showed excess burden of sleep wake disorders (14.53 (11.53, 17.36)) per 1000 COVID-19 patients at 6-months), anxiety and fear-related disorders (5.42 (3.42, 7.29)), and trauma and stress related disorders (8.93 (6.62, 11.09)). These findings were coupled with evidence of excess burden of incident use of non-opioid analgesics (19.97 (17.41, 22.40)), opioid analgesics (9.39 (7.21, 11.43)), antidepressants (7.83 (5.19, 10.30)) and benzodiazepines sedatives and anxiolytics (22.23 (20.68, 23.67)).

Excess burden of cardiovascular conditions included hypertension (15.18 (11.53, 18.62)) per 1000 COVID-19 patients at 6-months), cardiac dysrhythmias (8.41 (7.18, 9.53)), circulatory signs and symptoms (6.65 (5.18, 8.01)), chest pain (10.08 (8.63, 11.42)), coronary atherosclerosis (4.38 (2.96, 5.67)), and heart failure (3.94 (2.97, 4.80)). There was also evidence of excess burden of incident use of beta blockers (9.74 (8.06, 11.27)), calcium channel blockers (7.18 (5.61, 8.61)), loop diuretics (4.72 (3.59, 5.72)), thiazide diuretics (2.52 (1.37, 3.54)), and antiarrhythmics (1.28 (0.79, 1.67)).

To gain a better understanding of the spectrum of clinical manifestations in survivors of COVID-19 who got hospitalized, we undertook a comparative evaluation in a cohort of hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 vs. those hospitalized with seasonal influenza (a well-known, well characterized respiratory viral illness). The hospitalized cohort included 13,654 people with COVID-19 and 13,997 people with influenza who survived at least 30 days after hospital admission (Supplementary Fig. 2a and b). The median follow-up and interquartile range were 150 (84, 217) and 157 (87, 220) days in the COVID-19 and influenza groups (Extended data table 1). Testing of a panel of negative outcome controls including neoplasms and accidental injuries yielded results consistent with a priori expectations (HR 0.98 (0.83, 1.16), and HR 1.02 (0.90, 1.15), respectively) (results of all the negative outcome controls are provided in extended data table 2a). Examination of standardized differences of all high dimensional variables (including those selected and those that were not selected in the models) in all outcome specific cohorts showed that more than 99.75% of standardized differences were <0.1 after adjustment (Supplementary Fig. 4a and b), resulting in similar distributions of baseline characteristics in each group after adjustment (Supplementary table 6). Beyond the first 30 days of illness, COVID-19 survivors who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 had increased risk of death (HR=1.51 (1.30, 1.76)); excess death was estimated at 28.79 (19.52, 36.85) per 1000 persons at 6-months. Those with COVID-19 exhibited a higher risk of outpatient care encounter (HR 1.12 (1.08, 1.17), excess burden 6.37 (4.01, 9.03)) and with greater frequency (1.45 (1.28, 1.63) additional encounters every 30 days) (Extended data table 2b and c). Compared to those hospitalized with seasonal influenza, and beyond the first 30 days of illness, COVID-19 survivors who had been hospitalized for COVID-19 had a higher burden of a broad array of pulmonary and extrapulmonary systemic manifestations including neurologic disorders (nervous system disorders (19.78 (12.58, 26.19) per 1000 hospitalized COVID-19 patients) and neurocognitive disorders (16.16 (10.40, 21.19)), mental health disorders (e.g. mental and substance use conditions 7.75 (4.72, 10.10)), metabolic disorders (e.g. disorders of lipid metabolism 43.53 (28.71, 57.08)), cardiovascular disorders (e.g. circulatory signs and symptoms (17.92 (10.73, 24.35)), gastrointestinal disorders (e.g. dys****ia (19.28 (12.75, 25.13)), coagulation disorders (14.31 (10.08, 17.89)), pulmonary embolism (18.31 (15.83, 20.25)), and other disorders including malaise and fatigue (36.49 (28.13, 44.15)), and anemia (19.08 (10.58, 26.81)) (Extended data Fig. 2a-f, Extended data Fig. 3a-c, and supplementary table 7-10). Analyses of risk and burden of clinical manifestations which additionally adjusted for severity of the acute infection yielded consistent results in both direction and magnitude of estimates (Extended data Fig. 4a-f, extended data Fig. 5a-c, and supplementary table 11-14). A high dimensional comparative evaluation of 6-months outcomes in a cohort of hospitalized individuals with COVID-19 (N=13,654) vs. those hospitalized for other causes (N=901,516) yielded consistent results (Extended data Fig. 6a-f, extended data Fig. 7a-c, and supplementary table 15-18).

---

Quote:

---

The bolded is my point. Short term. You're not able to step back and understand that people are looking long-term, and nothing in the available numbers justifies them taking a long term risk.

---

aTm2004 said:

---

bay fan said:

---

aTm2004 said:

---

Fitch said:

---

I've got an Aunt who is a long hauler and an uncle had to have monoclonal antibody treatment. Lots of family friends who spent days sick and at least two that progressed to pneumonia and lost 10+ lbs while their kids shrugged it off in a few days with nothing but a runny nose.

Said this on another thread but a doctor friend / old lady from A&M days knows a dozen people dead, two in their 30's and a 23 y/o nurse. In no way is that the common outcome or even remotely likely, but the odds aren't zero either.

Another friend is a rheumatologist and acknowledged they're seeing "a ton of people every week" with post covid issues presenting in every flavor under the sun months after recovering.

---

You're taking to people with jaded views on it. They see the worse of it and assume it's that way for everyone, which it's not. They're not seeing or telling you about the countless others who had no or minimal issues and no long term effects. It reminds me of a conversation I had with a retired LEO who told me he had to learn early in his career to turn it off when he was off shift. When I asked him what he meant, he told me that he dealt with some of the worst people in the world, and he had to step out of his LEO mindset while he was off the job so he didn't see every guy as an alcoholic husband who abuses his wife and kids, didn't see every single mother as someone who allows their boyfriend to molest her daughter because he funds her drug habit, etc. He said he could remember in vivid detail the worst cases he was involved in but very few of the positive interactions he had with the public. I think we're seeing something similar from the medical community.

The point is, when all you see is the bad you forget about the good, which vastly outnumbers the bad.

---

That's funny. Doctors direct experience equates to "jaded" views because in your LACK of experience they are wrong? Okay, good to get that straight, best to pretend these problems don't exist by persistently saying so as nobody experiencing long term effect has sought out your advice.

---

You missed the entire point of what I am saying. If all you see is the bad, you begin to think that's how it is, when in reality, it's a very small percentage.

---