I wrote this in August 2020 in @TheLancet:
“So far in the COVID-19 pandemic, surveillance systems are not monitoring ill health and long-term implications of COVID-19, only deaths are reported.”
“So far in the COVID-19 pandemic, surveillance systems are not monitoring ill health and long-term implications of COVID-19, only deaths are reported.”
“A universal surveillance case definition of recovery from COVID-19 is still absent. Many people have prolonged symptoms, ill health, and reduced functionality for months, even if they were not hospitalised for SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
“We must move long-haul COVID from anecdote to something that is routinely quantified and monitored, as is currently being done with deaths and positive tests.”
“We must measure the proportion of cases with prolonged ill health, not only to provide support and care but also to redefine the true effect of the pandemic and inform the appropriate response to it.”
“Public health bodies must also universally agree definitions of what constitutes recovery, to estimate the true burden of ill health associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection.”
What I called for 18 months has not happened. We know much more about #LongCovid now but sadly many loud voices are still debating whether it’s important enough. They’re still still able to do that because of the absence of measurement and surveillance.
#CountLongCovid
#CountLongCovid
It’s extremely sad that it not properly measured in children which allowed the dominant narrative of mass infection of children is ‘harmless’ or may even be helpful in speeding up ‘herd immunity’. A risky narrative based on the absence of proper surveillance and measurement.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
