I posted the paper more for the interesting statement made than any other usefulness therein.
I posted the paper more for the interesting statement made than any other usefulness therein.
There's an interesting statement in this study. It's not really backed up with much, but it's just one of those "hmmm...." things.
An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease. But we could not find any literature on this association, and based on this study, we cannot imply causation. Age and sex, which was commonly found to be associated with Long COVID was not a significant predictor in our study. Cycle threshold (Ct) values of two genes were also not a significant predictor of Long COVID.
https://archive.ph/KS9mW https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.04.21268536v1.full
There's an interesting statement in this study. It's not really backed up with much, but it's just one of those "hmmm...." things.
> An observational paradox in our study was that the participants who took two doses of COVID-19 vaccination had higher odds of developing Long COVID. It could be due to better survival in vaccinated individuals who may continue to exhibit symptoms of COVID-19 disease. But we could not find any literature on this association, and based on this study, we cannot imply causation. Age and sex, which was commonly found to be associated with Long COVID was not a significant predictor in our study. Cycle threshold (Ct) values of two genes were also not a significant predictor of Long COVID.
https://archive.ph/KS9mW
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.01.04.21268536v1.full
(post is archived)