Abstract For the past 3 years, our daily lives have been largely dictated by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In many people, this infectious disease leads to long-lasting symptoms, which can vary greatly in form and intensity between individuals. This report describes the case of a young patient who had no health restrictions until she came into contact with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). As part of a post-COVID syndrome, she not only temporarily lost her ability to work, but was also no longer able to manage her daily life independently. A crucial therapeutic approach, in this case, was the use of heparin-induced extracorporeal LDL/fibrinogen precipitation (H.E.L.P.) apheresis. Open access, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00059-023-05177-3
Isn't that an expensive and somewhat risky (blood going outside of your body for a while) treatment to be considered 'practical'? I suppose that depends on the success rate. If it works well for even 30% of patients, with no severe harm to any patients, then maybe yes (depending on cost). If it only works for 1/3000 patients, with some worsened by the treatment, then no. What if this one case involved an unrecognized comorbid condition that the treatment worked on?
This isn't science, it's mostly advertising. There were subsequent infections. The patient was given all sorts of drugs, which may have helped, but may also have contributed to the symptom load.
