Long Covid/Post-Acute-Covid Syndrome as a‘hybrid condition’-A common framework for patients’ experience and pathophysiology (pre-print 2021) Richter

[Haveyoutriedyoga]

Long Covid/Post-Acute-Covid Syndrome as a‘hybrid condition’-A common framework for patients’ experience and pathophysiology

AUTHORS
Dirk RichterAnastasia Theodoridou
Pre-print, accessed December 2021

Abstract
While hundreds of thousands of patients suffer from Long Covid/Post-Acute Covid-Syndrome, the condition still remains a medical conundrum. Patients’ experiences and symptoms cannot always be linked to a pathophysiological mechanism. We present a hypothesis that depicts Long Covid as a hybrid condition, which means that pathophysiology and patients’ experience are partly due to different causal pathways. On the background of neuroscience and philosophy of science research, we propose to consider the infection per se as an ‘indifferent kind’ and patients’ experiences as an ‘interactive kind’. Interactive kinds represent the interactions between the human brain, psychological experiences and sociocultural factors. This approach allows the integration of the subjective experience of Long Covid patients and the pathophysiology into a common framework. Practically, this framework may help to prevent sufferers from experiencing a devaluation of their perspective. Long Covid/Post-Acute Covid Syndrome is a real medical condition and affected patients are truly sick.

https://psyarxiv.com/8k7vt/

 

[Haveyoutriedyoga]

Is the theory they propose really new..?

Edit

This seems to me to be a repackaging of the standard BPS model with new words and some token mentions of "epistemic injustice" to make it seem more palatable

 

[rvallee]

Hey, it's the new Malibu Stacy, it has a new hat! New hat! Well, no actually it's the same hat but it says "New hat!" on the box so it must be true!

Either this person has no awareness whatsoever of the history of so-called psychosomatic illnesses and how they have been defined for well over a century, or does and pretends otherwise. Either are super weird.

But the idea of a psyarxiv is simply absurd. Psychiatry is already a field where substance review is basically non-existent. To publish papers with even less scrutiny is pretty much madness. But it's a good platform to publish ideas older than electrification and present them as an entirely new thing no one's ever thought before. Although to be fair that's also the case of formal psychiatry academic so whatever.