Higher level of physical activity reduces mental and neurological symptoms during and 2 years after COVID-19 infection in young women, 2024, Takács et

Wyva

Wyva

Senior Member (Voting Rights)
Abstract

Previous studies found that regular physical activity (PA) can lower the risk of SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection and post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), yet its specific effects in young women have not yet been investigated. Thus, we aimed to examine whether regular physical activity reduces the number of symptoms during and after COVID-19 infection among young women aged between 18 and 34 (N = 802), in which the confounding effect of other morbidities could be excluded.

The average time since infection was 23.5 months. Participants were classified into low, moderate, and high PA categories based on the reported minutes per week of moderate and vigorous PA. Using the Post-COVID-19 Case Report Form, 50 different symptoms were assessed. Although regular PA did not decrease the prevalence of COVID-19 infection and PCC but significantly reduced the number of mental and neurological symptoms both in acute COVID-19 and PCC.

Importantly, the high level of PA had a greater impact on health improvements. In addition, the rate of reinfection decreased with an increased level of PA. In conclusion, a higher level of regular PA can reduce the risk of reinfection and the number of mental and neurological symptoms in PCC underlying the importance of regular PA, even in this and likely other viral disease conditions.

Open access: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-57646-2
 
One of the post-covid studies funded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. There a few mentions of PEM:

In sum, the most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue (63.2%), dysmenorrhea (55.3%), loss of interest/pleasure (52.6%), dizziness/light headedness (51.3%), forgetfulness (46.1%), anxiety (43.9%), depressed mood (43%), palpitations (42.1%) and trouble in concentrating (40.9%). In the case of depressed mood, forgetfulness and dizziness/light headedness, a higher frequency was shown in the low and moderate PA groups compared to the high PA group, while in the case of the following symptoms, it was the moderate PA group which showed a higher frequency compared to the low and high PA groups: loss of interest/pleasure, anxiety and cardiovascular symptoms such as palpitations, chest pain, post-exercise malaise and reduced smell as well as shortness of breath (Fig. 3). For data on all the symptoms in the sample and the PA categories, see Supplementary File 2.
Click to expand...

In PCC, the symptoms were similar to the symptoms in acute COVID-19. At the same time, cardiovascular symptoms such as palpitations, chest pain, and post-exertional malaise were still more frequently present/intermittent in the moderate activity group. In addition, loss of interest/pleasure, anxiety, reduced smell and shortness of breath were also more commonly reported in the moderate PA group. Previous studies found that higher PA levels (in line with the global physical activity guidelines) were associated with less-severe and a smaller number of symptoms PCC17,47. In the present study, cardiovascular symptoms were more frequent in the moderate PA group regardless of the symptoms in acute COVID-19. In most cases, cardiovascular symptoms co-occurred with neurological symptoms.
Click to expand...

Other studies showed that the intensity of regular physical activity is more crucial than other characteristics such as frequency, time, type or individual capacity48. However, it is controversial what the best intensity of physical activity is in different conditions48,49. Recent studies on people living with PCC found that fatigue and post-exertional malaise are frequently experienced44,50, although these symptoms may not only be caused by deconditioning51,52, and mental/neurological symptoms may also contribute to reduced exertional tolerance.
Click to expand...
 
Illness largely defined by inability to exert observed less in people able to exert themselves more.

"Higher levels of spending reduces financial symptoms during and 2 years after significant loss of income"

Notice how the title is explicitly framed as causative: you exert more, you will be less ill. Even though they cannot make such a causative claim based on the data they have. Different rules when it comes to disputed illnesses.
 
Trial By Error: Yet Another Long Covid Study with Bogus Claims Published by a Prestige Journal

"I’ve recently spent some time lambasting a Long Covid study in The BMJ that claimed a rehab program addressing both physical and mental health was “clinically effective”—even though the primary outcome results fell below the recommended level for what would be considered “minimal clinically important difference” on the measure in question. Now another high impact journal has published another Long Covid study that also engages in unacceptable methodological shenanigans."

https://virology.ws/2024/04/04/tria...bogus-claims-published-by-a-prestige-journal/
 
Andy said:
Trial By Error: Yet Another Long Covid Study with Bogus Claims Published by a Prestige Journal

"I’ve recently spent some time lambasting a Long Covid study in The BMJ that claimed a rehab program addressing both physical and mental health was “clinically effective”—even though the primary outcome results fell below the recommended level for what would be considered “minimal clinically important difference” on the measure in question. Now another high impact journal has published another Long Covid study that also engages in unacceptable methodological shenanigans."
Click to expand...

Worth noting that Nature Scientific Reports isn't a particularly prestigious journal @dave30th, it's by far the least significant publication attached to Nature. Some of the controversies on its wikipedia page include:

- The face of Donald Trump was hidden in an image of baboon feces in a paper published in 2018. The journal later removed the image.

- A controversial 2018 paper suggested that too much bent-neck staring at a cell phone could grow a "horn" on the back of someone's head. The study also failed to mention the conflict of interests of the first author.

- It took Scientific Reports more than four years to retract a plagiarized study from a bachelor's thesis of a Hungarian mathematician. The paper, entitled "Modified box dimension and average weighted receiving time on the weighted fractal networks", was published in December 2015, and the plagiarism was reported in January 2016 by the former bachelor student. In April 2020, the paper was retracted.

- A study published in the journal on June 24, 2019, claimed that fluctuations in the sun were causing global warming. Based on severe criticism from the scientific community, Scientific Reports started an investigation on the validity of this study, and it was retracted by the editors in March 2020

- A paper published in July 2020, which said body weight can be correlated with being honest or dishonest, caused consternation among social media users, questioning why Scientific Reports agreed to publish this paper. The paper was eventually retracted in January 2021.

- A paper published in September 2021 implied that the Biblical story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah might have been a retelling of an exploding asteroid around the year 1,650 BCE. The paper received criticism on social media and by data sleuths for using a doctored image.

And there's far more from where that came! I'm sure some decent research is published in Scientific Reports, but it also clearly publishes a great deal of (rather amusing) nonsense.
 
Trial By Error: My Letter to Scientific Reports about New Study of Physical Activity and Long Covid

"The other day I posted a blog about yet another problematic Long Covid study published by a major journal. The study concluded that physical activity (PA) can “reduce” symptoms in young women with prolonged medical complaints after Covid-19, or what the authors call post-COVID condition (PCC). The problem: the study design is capable of documenting associations but not causal relationships—such as the relationship described by the use of the verb “to reduce.”

This morning I sent the following letter to Dr Rafal Marszalek, the top editor at Scientific Reports, the journal from the Nature group that published the study."

https://virology.ws/2024/04/07/tria...ew-study-of-physical-activity-and-long-covid/
 
RaviHVJ said:
it's by far the least significant publication attached to Nature.
Click to expand...

Wow, thanks for all those examples, which I hadn't bothered to look up. Looks like a good excuse for a follow-up post! On the issue of whether it's prestigious, I think it's fair to say that any journal under the Nature umbrella is a prestigious journal just by virtue of being part of Nature. Obviously that's different from calling it a quality journal! The BMJ also publishes lots of crap, like the recent Warwick study of LC rehab, but it's still a prestigious journal.

Who knows if I'll get a response? But I thought it was important to put the issue on the record.
 
RaviHVJ said:
- The face of Donald Trump was hidden in an image of baboon feces in a paper published in 2018. The journal later removed the image.

- A controversial 2018 paper suggested that too much bent-neck staring at a cell phone could grow a "horn" on the back of someone's head. The study also failed to mention the conflict of interests of the first author.
Click to expand...

Guys, I think we could do at least as well between us for next 1 April! :rofl:
 
Kitty said:
Guys, I think we could do at least as well between us for next 1 April! :rofl:
Click to expand...
It has crossed my mind that we could try writing a bogus paper using the jargon and concepts psychosomatics is so enamoured with, and submitting it to leading psychosomatic friendly journals to see if they could spot the difference.

“For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh at them in our turn?”
Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice​

I think we have earned a little mirth at their expense. :sneaky:
 
From the website of Semmelweis University (translated by Google Translate):

Dr. Ákos Koller received one of the most prestigious awards of the American Physiological Society

He is one of the authors of the above study. He didn't receive the award for his work on long covid specifically but the article also proudly mentions the problematic study in this thread, which David Tuller also discussed.

Most of the article is about Koller's (mostly unrelated) work in general, and you can read the full article in English here, in this Google translated version. I only share a few relevant excerpts here:

The recognition of the cardiovascular section of the American Physiological Society, named after the founder of the section, Carl J. Wiggers, is awarded annually to a researcher who makes significant discoveries, creates a school, and inspires the wider professional public. In 2024, Dr. Dr. Ákos Koller, professor at Semmelweis University, won the award, which he will receive in Baltimore after his presentation at next year's congress.

(...) His interest in the impact of physical activity is also reflected in the magazine Sport Research International, which he founded with the support of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

Also in relation to Covid-19, in joint research with Johanna Takács, assistant professor of the Faculty of Health Sciences , it was established that a physically active life and movement significantly improves and alleviates post-covid mental dysfunctions, such as negative symptoms related to memory, including word recall difficulties. He also participates in university research related to gestational hypertension and preeclampsia , working together with professor János Rigó, assistant professor Bálint Alasztics and TDK student Dorka Járai.​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom