What is "Long COVID" and how was it proved that all participants in the study "have" it?
Not sure why this is downvoted. I am not qualified to read the paper but I have the same question. My impression was that "long covid" was self reported and there is no way to medically confirm if someone is actually has "long covid"
That’s like saying there’s no way to medically confirm that someone has a sore throat. Of course we may wish to determine the underlying cause of the sore throat, but even if we can’t that doesn’t mean that someone doesn’t have a sore throat.
We don’t yet know the underlying cause of long covid symptoms, which is what research like this is trying to uncover.
What is "Long COVID" and how was it proved that all participants in the study "have" it?
Well for a study trying to find biological markers of a condition, I imagine the only way to source people is by self reporting. Because they haven’t found the markers yet…
This paper was from the journal "IOVS - Investigative ophthalmology and visual science". So, I sent a copy to my ophthalmologist and asked his opinion. He replied that he couldn't understand any of it.
What is "Long COVID" and how was it proved that all participants in the study "have" it?
Not sure why this is downvoted. I am not qualified to read the paper but I have the same question. My impression was that "long covid" was self reported and there is no way to medically confirm if someone is actually has "long covid"
How can you medically confirm someone has depression, chronic pain, or anxiety? You can't with diagnostic tests but you can observe their behavior and ask them.
"Long Covid" is extremely similar to other post viral illnesses that have been observed for decades, just getting more attention now.
This paper was from the journal "IOVS - Investigative ophthalmology and visual science". So, I sent a copy to my ophthalmologist and asked his opinion. He replied that he couldn't understand any of it. Should I start looking for a new ophthalmologist? .
No, of course not, unless you are funding him to research long Covid.
Some doctors are unwilling to admit when they don't know something. If he was like that, then maybe it would make sense to start looking for another ophthamologist.
Maybe someone with a medical background can answer this: Does this mean that long covid could be treated by blocking certain protein receptors?
Most probably not, at least not based on this study.
First of all, GPCRs are a class of many different receptors present in many different cells and with vastly different downstream effects, nothing that could easily be reversed with a targeted pharmacological intervention. Secondly, if there are general anti-GPCR antibodies present, it is most likely that they would inhibit the receptors or lead to damage of the cells expressing the receptors. Activating autoantibodies do exist (a form of hyperthyroidism being a common example) but are not the norm, so additional blocking would not be indicated. I also have some questions about the study as such. First of all, this is only an abstract that doesn’t describe all of their methods, it absolutely doesn’t allow any conclusions. My field of research is not GPCRs so I can’t say whether it’s common in that niche but their choice of using an in vitro rat (this cross-species) cardiomyocyte assay for antibody detection coupled with the absence of a proper control group or seropositivity threshold (at least not mentioned in the abstract) immediately makes me want to see further data before I trust anything described here. Their presentation style also seems confusing to me at a first glance and making it hard to tell what they did. Would have to spend more time on this and with the proper paper to disassemble everything. It also seems odd that they would not investigate this further if they indeed believed it to be involved in Long Covid at the systemic levels but rather chose to publish this in an ophthalmology journal.
What is "Long COVID" and how was it proved that all participants in the study "have" it?
Long covid is ongoing chronic illness symptoms following a covid infection, including but not limited to fatigue, heart problem, lung problems, brain fog, and auto-immune problems.
By that definition, anyone experiencing chronic illness symptoms "following" (said another way, "after") a Covid infection has "Long Covid" - even if Covid had nothing to do with those chronic illness symptoms developing or continuing.
Not sure why this is downvoted. I am not qualified to read the paper but I have the same question. My impression was that "long covid" was self reported and there is no way to medically confirm if someone is actually has "long covid"
That’s like saying there’s no way to medically confirm that someone has a sore throat. Of course we may wish to determine the underlying cause of the sore throat, but even if we can’t that doesn’t mean that someone doesn’t have a sore throat. We don’t yet know the underlying cause of long covid symptoms, which is what research like this is trying to uncover.
You can say that one has sore throat, or fever, or fatigue, or headache.
But if you say one has long COVID, you are describing a condition (possibly a new illness, but not yet?) with a wide range of symptoms that occur in different combinations in different people, it seems fine to ask for clarification about what sets it apart other than having gone through acute COVID (natural question, as a person who has gone through acute COVID can still subsequently fall ill with an illness unrelated to COVID).
It is sufficiently vague that I have the same question each time I see the term. Maybe this subthread-starter was sincere?