Exploring the Experiences of Living With the Post-COVID Syndrome: A Qualitative Study, 2024, Chalder et al

ABSTRACT

Introduction
Many people experience persistent symptoms for more than 12 weeks following SARS-CoV-2 infection, which is known as post-COVID-19 condition (PCS) or Long COVID (LC). PCS can impair people's quality of life and daily functioning. However, there is a lack of in-depth research exploring the PCS patient journey, as well as gendered aspects of patients' experiences.

Methods
Nineteen semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with people living with PCS in the United Kingdom (13 women, 6 men). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using reflexive thematic analysis.

Results
Five main themes were identified: ‘Symptom dismissal’, ‘Lack of information and support’, ‘Life before and after Long COVID’, ‘Psychological impact’ and ‘Acceptance’. A shift overtime to self-management of symptoms was evident. These themes represent different stages of patients' PCS journey. Narratives indicated that women highlighted dismissal by healthcare professionals (HCPs), which was not as prominent in men's narratives. In addition, women went into more detail about the psychological impact of PCS compared to men.

Conclusion
Women with PCS reported symptom dismissal by HCPs, which may have delayed their diagnosis and negatively affected their well-being. We were not able to explore the experiences of people from non-conforming gender groups. Raising awareness of these issues among HCPs, particularly general practitioners, could improve patient care in PCS.

Patient or Public Contribution
Patient and public involvement consisted of people who took part in the interviews and commented on the themes' interpretation and study conclusions.

Open access, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.14108

 

Highly absurd to have one of the major proponents of those attitudes continue to get money 'studying' the impact of those attitudes, yet somehow learn nothing at all from it. It's a completely shallow study as well, the only purpose here is to pad the resume of the authors, it adds nothing at all, features no useful information or insight, in fact ignores pretty much everything that matters. There have been better articles published by mainstream journalists, they simply let the patients speak for themselves.

This is the outcome of the biopsychosocial model of illness pushing psychosomatic pseudoscience. The very life's work of the (co-)lead author. Making money ruining people's lives, and making money studying the devastating consequences. It's revolting.

The first two are the explicit biopsychosocial model as applied to chronic illness and ME/CFS specifically, while the 3rd one is especially absurd, ideologues like Chalder have written and said so much about how we don't want our old lives back, because they are assumed to have been the state of unhappiness that led us to be unhappy and 'somatize' distress, or whatever. But of course that was always completely false, almost every last one of us would go back to our old lives without a second's hesitation, and have said so, but someone who has made a career insisting otherwise can write those words plainly and feel zero shame or regret at having lied to make a false point supporting an old mythical conclusion.

What a complete waste of millions of lives. All they have to show for it is bad pseudoscience and complete lack of self-awareness about the consequences of their actions.