Odd 'study', if it can be called that. The choice of the name itself is odd. This 'PCS' is very rarely used and this study is published after hundreds on the same issue have been published. I guess it's because using LC in a study by MDs, for MDs, about MDs is seen as problematic. Snowflakes must flake.
We replicate findings that direct contact with COVID-19 patients, older age, female sex, pre-existing respiratory illness and symptoms of common mental disorders are associated with increased risk of PCS
Which also happen to be the most common symptoms found in health care. So that's a choice to frame it this way. A biased choice with an obvious agenda. One that does not want to pay for sick leave and disability, which sometimes feels is the most important thing of all.
Aside from the creepiness factor of Wessely being involved at any level in the thing he helped break, exemplified by the discrepancy in confirmed diagnoses, this is basically the thing he is most famous for. He built his career on it, everything that followed was all on the basis of his work working with this very issue and similar ones, which he also helped break. And just like Crawley, who was only one of several named authors on a study of pediatric LC, he is just one named author on this study. It doesn't say much about any loss of influence, but it says a lot about how little value his work and ideas actually have. In real life, his work is of no value whatsoever. It's just convenient to prop up the old myths.
There are a few references to his past work. And this:
Due to the associated symptoms and lack of a known mechanism, PCS has drawn comparisons with other conditions, such as myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS).
5 ME/CFS is a long-term condition defined by postexertional malaise, which may have a delayed onset, physical and mental fatigue and fatigability, issues with sleeping, memory or concentration, and functional impairment, which may be substantial.
16 Diagnoses are made if the defining symptoms last for 6 months or longer and cannot be attributed to an alternative cause.
Reference #16 is to the 2021 NICE guideline. This here includes that it's "defined by postexertional malaise", which is one of the main points of discord over the rejected guideline. Although didn't they change that to 3 months? Anyway this is something Wessely and his gang threw a tantrum about, and managed to rope in the professional associations.
No idea how they came up with that. This obviously does not come from data other than LC being commonly mislabeled as mental illness:
Screening positive for mental disorders was the strongest observed risk factor for reporting PCS at least 12 months later.
But the answer follows quickly:
Failure to assess mental disorders as a risk factor for PCS or Long COVID, along with other important factors, will weaken our understanding of the condition.
Obviously the real problem all along is that no one thought to screen for mental health before and did not emphasize how important it could be. Yup. They got it solved, real finger on the pulse.
Kind of funny to write this considering Wessely:
History of common mental disorders (CMDs) prior to COVID-19 infection has also been explored, though this remains under-researched and poorly understood.
It is under-researched and poorly understood but it has literally been asserted as a fact and forced onto hundreds of thousands for years. On the basis of his work. They don't know much about it, but are fanatical in forcing it down millions of people's throats. Yup. Genius work there.
So yeah looking at how they came up with the data for common mental disorders, they just use the standard questionnaires with overlapping questions. Can't work and function? Have trouble with everyday activities? Clearly mental health. No physical illness can cause this, obviously. See, these people are experts and stuff.
Also, oooh that's a lot of missing data on those questionnaires with the overlapping questions. A bad study falsely attributing LC to mental illness always needs that.
Ahh, ye olde conversion disorder, still everpresent for reasons that will never make sense:
These have speculated that symptoms of CMDs may be a risk factor due to potential physical manifestation of psychological distress
Speculation about imaginary but convenient processes. About things used in standard practice for decades onto millions. That's how real pros, well, literally never do anything. But those aren't real pros, they're sham pros.
Odd, and unlikely:
While we do not identify any individual in this study as having ME/CFS, we note the similarity between not just symptoms, as many have pointed out, but also at least five risk factors for PCS and ME/CFS (infection, asthma, a history of CMDs, female sex and older age) which should not be ignored and similarities between the conditions may require further exploration.
It has already been explored plenty so far. Somehow they 'missed' it. They just
know nothing about it. Nope. Total surprise here.
