A Cross-Sectional Study of the Health of Emerging Young Adults in England Following a COVID-19 Infection 2023 Newlands, Chalder et al

Purpose
This study describes long COVID symptomatology in a national sample of 18- to 20-year-olds with Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)-confirmed Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‑CoV‑2) and matched test-negative controls in England. Symptoms in 18- to 20-year-olds were compared to symptoms in younger adolescents (aged 11–17 years) and all adults (18+).

Methods
A national database was used to identify SARS-CoV-2 PCR-positive 18- to 20-year-olds and test-negative controls matched by time of test, age, gender, and geographical region. Participants were invited to complete a questionnaire about their health retrospectively at time of test and also when completing the questionnaire. Comparison cohorts included children and young people with long COVID and REal-time Assessment of Community Transmission studies.

Results
Of 14,986 people invited, 1,001 were included in the analysis (562 test-positive; 440 test-negative). At testing, 46.5% of test-positives and 16.4% of test-negatives reported at least one symptom. At the time of questionnaire completion (median 7 months post-testing), 61.5% of test-positives and 47.5% of test-negatives reported one or more symptoms. The most common symptoms were similar amongst test-positives and test-negatives and included tiredness (44.0%; 35.7%), shortness of breath (28.8%; 16.3%), and headaches (13.7%; 12.0%). Prevalence rates were similar to those reported by 11–17-year-olds (66.5%) and higher than those reported in all adults (37.7%).

For 18- to 20-year-olds, there was no significant difference in health-related quality of life and well-being (p > .05). However, test-positives reported being significantly more tired than test-negatives (p = .04).

Discussion
Seven months after PCR test, a high proportion of test-positive and test-negative 18- to 20-year-olds reported similar symptoms to each other and to those experienced by younger and older counterparts.

Open access, https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(23)00076-9/fulltext

 

Somewhat ironically, under the section "Bias" —

 

I've seen it presented as "Long Covid has nothing to do with COVID". And of course the minimizers who gloat about this have their replies filled with antivaxxers and other trolls who agree with them and laugh along. It's made out to be an invention by the media to sell fear about COVID. And of course loads and loads of blaming everything on vaccines in the same replies. The minimizers don't seem to care or clue in about what it means for trolls to love their messaging.

The BPS model is fully generic and does not allow for a biological cause. They may pretend all they want that they accept an infection as a starting point, but the model is strictly psychosocial, it happens after the infection, after it's gone, leaving no biological/physiological consequence of any kind. This is why they go on about experiencing the pandemic, stress and other nonsense.

They need MUS to be detached from a specific cause, otherwise it's not unexplained. They need the model to be as fuzzy and generic as possible, even as they go around pretending like it makes sense to "test" every specific combination. The BPS ideology needs LC to have nothing to do with COVID. It can't have anything but "psychosocial" factors, which at this point is just as much a buzzword as holistic and evidence-based.