In the study itself, there is only one mention of "vaccine" or "vaccination", here:
"For the LC group, 50 patients [18 males, 32 females; mean age 50 ( ± 17)] were recruited through clinical collaborators who identified post-acute COVID-19 individuals with persistent LC symptoms. LC patients completed a questionnaire detailing their demographics, comorbidities, medication use, COVID-19 vaccination history, severity of initial infection, and self-reported LC symptoms."
This seems to me to indicate that they did not differentiate those suffering from "Long COVID" who did not receive a COVID jab from those who received the jabs, or document how many jabs they got and when. This would be confounding factor that would be terminal to the paper's conclusions that "Long COVID" leads to elevated anomalous amyloids. No doubt, if they had separated the jabbed from the unjabbed, their paper would never have made it to publication though.
No doubt, if they had separated the jabbed from the unjabbed, their paper would never have made it to publication though.
You know how things get done. Maybe they leave the real information in the appendix now.
The trouble is that even in the appendix, there is no way of determining which of the 5 "Long COVID" group members weren't jabbed. So the data remains conflated.
Maybe they need an appendix to the appendix that has a table that maps the participant ID to the number of jabs they got.