rvallee
Senior Member (Voting Rights)
The biggest weaknesses of those past studies is that they are very biased towards the sickest cases. Considering how difficult it has been in the context of COVID to include mild, even asymptomatic cases, I don't see how past studies in different contexts could have even considered this possibility. Same with SARS. Considering COVID, it's actually very likely that many cases were not the typical ARDS profile and were simply never considered SARS. SARS also featured extensive neurological symptoms and it's likely that it also caused different illness profiles, neurological, dysautonomic, GI or otherwise.This runs contrary to the 2005 Dubbo study, where post-infectious development of ME symptoms was linked to self-reported symptom severity.
So studies like Dubbo would have been only confirmed cases with medical follow-up. Most mild cases of COVID had no follow-up. Almost all mild cases of mild infectious disease get no medical follow-up. Many cases are so mild that they would not even have been considered COVID had it not been for the community organizing.
Honestly almost all past research on this topic is flawed to the point of uselessness because of assumptions about infectious illnesses that have now been completely debunked. There is no reason to assume that COVID is unique in having such a wide range of severity and symptoms, leading to most cases never even being seen in a clinical setting. Not to say they are 100% incorrect but they rely on assumptions that clearly have little to no validity.