Long COVID in the United States, 2023, David G. Blanchflower and Alex Bryson

Long COVID in the United States
David G. Blanchflower; Alex Bryson

Although yet to be clearly identified as a clinical condition, there is immense concern at the health and wellbeing consequences of long COVID. Using data collected from nearly half a million Americans in the period June 2022-December 2022 in the US Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey (HPS), we find 14 percent reported suffering long COVID at some point, half of whom reported it at the time of the survey. Its incidence varies markedly across the United States–from 11 percent in Hawaii to 18 percent in West Virginia–and is higher for women than men, among Whites compared with Blacks and Asians, and declines with rising education and income. It is at its highest in midlife in the same way as negative affect. Ever having had long COVID is strongly associated with negative affect (anxiety, depression, worry and a lack of interest in things), with the correlation being strongest among those who currently report long COVID, especially if they report severe symptoms. In contrast, those who report having had short COVID report higher wellbeing than those who report never having had COVID. Long COVID is also strongly associated with physical mobility problems, and with problems dressing and bathing. It is also associated with mental problems as indicated by recall and understanding difficulties. Again, the associations are strongest among those who currently report long COVID, while those who said they had had short COVID have fewer physical and mental problems than those who report never having had COVID. Vaccination is associated with lower negative affect, including among those who reported having had long COVID.

Link | PDF (PLOS ONE)

 

Hardly surprising. A few years ago, Blanchflower, now banned from X/Twitter, went on a sustained pro-PACE troll spree that was unique in its length and blind stubbornness. Numerous attempts were made to provide him with the literature that had subsequently led to the downgrading of PACE, but while he claimed to have read it, he refused to engage on any aspect of the data or its reevaluation. He instead limited his responses to that the Lancet was a superior journal and it was clear that the evidence supported the conclusions, though eventually he did reveal that he was mates with Peter White. It was very strange; his voice was quite odd yet authoritative to the point of being arrogant. Apparently his background as an economist is considerable, and he has served in an official capacity dealing with monetary policy. He seems to have developed an interest in the BPS aspects of Long Covid, with at least one other publication in this area--just what we need, right?

Fortunately I think he's blown any credibility he might've had; a couple of years ago he published a paper predicting a recession due notably to 'women who are afraid to go back to work.' Seriously. The similarities to Edward Shorter are almost uncanny. I expect we'll see more of the same incoherent nonsense; but if there's an upside it's that a basic search on him leads to a truly bizarre rabbit-hole of eccentricity.