Thread by @apsmunro

I really don't find the term "long COVID" useful

I think it's confusing, particularly for the lay public - but if I'm honest even I'm not sure what it's referring to most of the time

1/7

Importantly, the term is misleading because it's NOT COVID; it's *post COVID-19* syndromes

This is not pedantic - I've seen people ask, "are you still infectious if you have long COVID?"

So what actually is "long COVID"?

As far as I can tell, its several distinct entities

2/7

First, prolonged symptoms of fatigue/breathlessness after severe illness which last for several weeks/months

This is not unique to COVID, as it's a well recognised after effect of pneumonia or severe infections in general

Eventually it improves

blf.org.uk/support-for-yo…

3/7

Next, long term complications of critical illness secondary to either severe systemic inflammatory complications or iatrogenic harm (both physical and psychological)

Some of this may be reversible, some organ damage may not

sccm.org/MyICUCare/THRI…

4/7

Finally, chronic fatigue syndrome

Prolonged, sometimes profound fatigue which may be accompanied by a myriad other symptoms with no clear organic cause

A recognised complication of viral illnesses, can be long term but can improve with rehab

nhs.uk/conditions/chr…

5/7

People also seem to confuse the terminology with the recently much hyped myocarditis in young, asymptomatic patients - which seems to be lacking any credible evidence at present.

6/7

https://twitter.com/ProfDFrancis/status/1302571279778746369?s=20

Each of these things has very distinct risk profiles, implications, research needs, therapy needs etc and bundling them all together under a term which makes the public think people are still infected is not helping

We have specific terms for these things. Lets use them

7/7