The authors say
"There are currently no validated effective treatments for long COVID (3)."
and then try very hard, without actually having any proof, to suggest that exercise should be used to treat Long Covid. E.g.
"Long COVID also has been associated with increased stress levels, anxiety, and depression (35). Regular exercise has been shown to alleviate stress and anxiety (36) and has been associated with lower odds of incident depression or an increase in subclinical symptoms (37). The evidence indicates that exercise is an important medicine for treating these symptoms of long COVID. In summary, exercise remains a type of polypill that helps to ameliorate the harmful effects of COVID-19 on the neuroendocrine system (23)."
"Noteworthy for COVID-19 rehabilitation is that research has identified that mitochondria are damaged with COVID-19 infection and are involved in symptoms (such as fatigue) of long COVID (40). Exercise has been found to “clean-up” nonfunctioning, damaged mitochondria, and thus ensure that energy production is optimized and skeletal muscle health is maintained (41)."
Before admitting in the conclusion.
"Conclusion
The Figure compares the effects of COVID-19 versus the “opposing” effects of exercise to this virus. The evidence presented in this review adds to the Nieman et al. (65) viewpoint, that it is time to include “treatment for and reduced risk of COVID-19 and long COVID” to the “Exercise is Medicine list of physical activity-related health benefits.” The potent, multi-organ effects of exerkines position exercise as the most important medicine for COVID-19 and long COVID. However, it should be noted that the evidence exists for non-COVID-19 patients and needs to be verified in COVID-19 and long COVID patients.
Future research needs to investigate the suggested molecular pathways and mechanisms within clinical trials of exercise interventions for long COVID. This will allow for the mapping of molecular transducers and signaling pathways that occur during exercise with individuals post COVID-19, with long COVID."
The dimwit approach - and we've all been there when most pwme say there were at least 'more active than most' (many athletes) prior to getting it, becomes ignored and rewritten to the assumption of 'well Chalder or whoever wrote its caused by deconditioning so that reality mustn't be true - throw in enough words that you think make you look like you know what you are talking about whilst the main thrust is actually missing.
Like baking a cake that is over-covered in sprinkles, icing and jam but you've used no flour or eggs and didn't bother cooking it? And thinking you've made a cake underneath all of that and are a baker.
Ignore reality that we've had enough articles come out that show it is often the fittest athletes who ended up debilatated by long covid. Then do an entire paper claiming expertise on a condition you've chosen not to even see one patient for. Sounds familiar to the Beard and McCready retrospective a bit.
If this were indeed (some of it) both correct and being used as the 'starter' for an experiment that was then planning on mapping what
instead happened
which was different to this in those who do have Covid-19 and then Long covid........ well that would be at least some sort of scientific brain - or at least curiousity.
At least we can get some insight into the self-delusion process is happenning when people like this write out their workings out they delude themselves with to allow themselves to keep believing - I've never understood why they care so much about something that affects others lives catasrophically but not their own one jot - erm... made-up this is what I fancy believing today because it suits me stuff.
This is like someone trying to say out-loud why they are rubbing their eyes unable to understand what they see in front of them with a condition that gets worse with exercise. And explaining their unknown knowns then failing to go any further in saying ... so we'll check whether 2 + 2 = 5 and reassess what we think we know, because that is science, if so.
Does this stuff just come from the 'I am just incapable of saying 'I don't know' and looking into it' crowd being unable to resist lurching into the BS-part of their brain in order to say
something on their feet as they think
that will mean they
don't look like they don't know what they are talking about?
Anyway I'm beginnning to think that we need a whole new research area in the future - which would indeed be psych-based - looking into and focusing on naming and describing the conditions and the treatments for all the people who are behind this BPS'y stuff. It's a habit for flawed thinking but the bit I struggle with is the motivation pre-gravy train and whether it is group psychology or what. So I'd be fascinated to begin seeing it be properly dissected.
