Thread by @VirusesImmunity

An important thread from @PutrinoLab about why we should not be excluding PCR/Ab negative #LongCovid from analysis. So proud of @PutrinoLab for refusing to succumb to reviewers’ demand -which would have resulted in exclusion of data from underrepresented minorities. (1/)

https://twitter.com/putrinolab/status/1379588811995369472

I wish to highlight the importance of their study in this short thread and why I think it should be published ASAP. 84 people with long covid were examined for various symptoms in a retrospective cross-sectional observational study.(2/)

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

First, look at the demographic data of those with #LongCovid. Compared to acute severe COVID (in older adults, male>female), long haulers appear more skewed towards women of younger age. (3/)

Second, of the participants (92%) with antibody test, only 39% were positive at the time of testing. This suggests that long haulers may be inducing suboptimal/short-lived Ab responses compared to other convalescent people. Only 28% PCR+: likely missed test time window. (4/)

Now look at the lingering symptoms. In addition to those shared during acute illness, others include fatigue, dizziness, irregular heart beat & temperature, numbness, heart palpitations, sleeping difficulty, hair loss, menstrual cycle issues…etc. Debilitating symptoms. (5/)

Importantly, symptoms are similar between those with confirmed (PCR+ or Ab+) and presumed (confirmed by a medical doctor) long COVID cases. These results support the inclusion of presumed long COVID patients who for one reason or another do not have a positive test. (6/)

As we move forward with scientific and clinical investigation into post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS), this study provides important evidence for inclusion of presumed COVID cases and motivates the community to come to a consensus regarding inclusion criteria for PACS. (End)