The Long Long Covid Post
thezvi.wordpress.com
The Long Long Covid Post
1–10 of 10 posts
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#2Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#3This post caused me to update my cautious strategy to a somewhat less cautious one. Hoping to invite discussion about aspects Zvi might be missing, though
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#41. 25% chance for literal anything at all, sure, why not.
2. 66% reduction from vaccination plus booster (but requires booster)
3. 50% reduction from being asymptomatic early on and then this went up later, combined with asymptomatic cases not being quite totally safe
4. 50% reduction from Omicron only, on precautionary principle
5. 50% reduction for sticking around
6. 0% reduction from the second sticking around reduction because I’m worried about 7. accidentally double-counting somewhere and want to be safe
7. 60% reduction for ‘as bad as all that’ based among other things on my survey
8. 25% reduction for misattribution to give benefit of the doubt
9. 0% impact of good health
That gets us back to a 0.2% chance of Long Covid conditional on first infection, and less than that less for all future ones combined because of immune strengthening.
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#5I'm sorry but this kind of calculation is handwavy to the point of absurdity. The author might as well be pulling this number out of a hat. 1. 25% chance for literal anything at all, sure, why not. 2. 66% reduction from vaccination plus booster (but requires booster) 3. 50% reduction from being asymptomatic early on and then this went up later, combined with asymptomatic cases not being quite totally safe 4. 50% redu…
This quote in particular seems rather ironic in light of the current labor shortage: "Do we see evidence of the types of sweeping changes we’d expect to see if several percent of people are suddenly unable to work? No, we don’t."
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#6I'm sorry but this kind of calculation is handwavy to the point of absurdity. The author might as well be pulling this number out of a hat. 1. 25% chance for literal anything at all, sure, why not. 2. 66% reduction from vaccination plus booster (but requires booster) 3. 50% reduction from being asymptomatic early on and then this went up later, combined with asymptomatic cases not being quite totally safe 4. 50% redu…
The entire thing seems handwavey to the point of "don't believe your lying eyes". The author is basically saying we need to ignore people's self-reported incidence of having Long Covid. This quote in particular seems rather ironic in light of the current labor shortage: "Do we see evidence of the types of sweeping changes we’d expect to see if several percent of people are suddenly unable to work? No, we don’t."
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire thing seems handwavey to the point of "don't believe your lying eyes". The author is basically saying we need to ignore people's self-reported incidence of having Long Covid. This quote in particular seems rather ironic in light of the current labor shortage: "Do we see evidence of the types of sweeping changes we’d expect to see if several percent of people are suddenly unable to work? No, we don’t."
Neither I nor any of the ~20 COVID recoverees I have met and talked with in real life had any long term symptoms. These are all youngish, vaccinated, healthy people. Long COVID seems to primarily exist among a vocal internet minority, as far as I can tell. YMMV.
It wasn't as bad as the original infection, but on bad days getting up and walking to the kitchen was a real challenge. I was in fairly good health before this, not obese, walked about a mile each day, and now I couldn't walk around my house.
That was 20 years ago.
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#8I'm sorry but this kind of calculation is handwavy to the point of absurdity. The author might as well be pulling this number out of a hat. 1. 25% chance for literal anything at all, sure, why not. 2. 66% reduction from vaccination plus booster (but requires booster) 3. 50% reduction from being asymptomatic early on and then this went up later, combined with asymptomatic cases not being quite totally safe 4. 50% redu…
The entire thing seems handwavey to the point of "don't believe your lying eyes". The author is basically saying we need to ignore people's self-reported incidence of having Long Covid. This quote in particular seems rather ironic in light of the current labor shortage: "Do we see evidence of the types of sweeping changes we’d expect to see if several percent of people are suddenly unable to work? No, we don’t."
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#9This post caused me to update my cautious strategy to a somewhat less cautious one. Hoping to invite discussion about aspects Zvi might be missing, though
He’s probably mostly correct, but remember he doesn’t have any actual medical qualifications.
Re: The Long Long Covid Post
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire thing seems handwavey to the point of "don't believe your lying eyes". The author is basically saying we need to ignore people's self-reported incidence of having Long Covid. This quote in particular seems rather ironic in light of the current labor shortage: "Do we see evidence of the types of sweeping changes we’d expect to see if several percent of people are suddenly unable to work? No, we don’t."
Neither I nor any of the ~20 COVID recoverees I have met and talked with in real life had any long term symptoms. These are all youngish, vaccinated, healthy people. Long COVID seems to primarily exist among a vocal internet minority, as far as I can tell. YMMV.
I suspect this is an important differentiator.
A lot of us who got Covid before the vaccines have lingering issues.