Also I think relying on quotes from doctors who treat patients with mind-body techniques in lieu of actual scientific evidence is quite problematic.
Over the course of the illness, I've interacted with very few doctors who aren't utterly convinced that their treatments largely cure patients - whether the treatment in question is HELP apheresis, HBOT, triple anti-coagulation therapy, functional medicine, or anti-virals.
Doctors tend to believe that what they're offering patients will really help those patients, and they'll find data points that corroborate their beliefs. When I got HBOT from a doctor who said that the treatment "improved 70% by 70%, improved 20% by 90%, and 10% didn't improve," there were lots of postcards on the wall from Long Covid patients who had been "cured."
There are a couple of appeals to recovery stories as well in the article, and again, this seems like a way of sidestepping any kind of scientific rigor or scrutiny. Just as you can find a doctor who says they've cured most of their patients with mind-body techniques, if you exist in a mind-body echo chamber, you're constantly going to hear about mind-body recovery stories and ignore any other data point.
So a lot of the article seems rooted in sources which allow her to impose her own views upon the illness without having to defer annoying things like data or control groups.