Long covid rare in children

[Bobholll]

Contrary to mumsnet, where long covid is RIFE in children & everyone knows at least 5 who can’t get out of bed, a new study is showing that it’s thankfully rare & most children recover in a week.

The professor also mentions that most those with on-going symptoms recovered over time.

Nice to see they are keeping an eye statistically on this stuff & that it’s very reassuring.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58071898

"Well, by that standard, Sage is also an activist group." No, because Sage are an official government body and Indie Sage aren't?

We must looking at different threads ….

What a shame that "balance and positivity" has to be inaccurate then (as not "rare" at 1.8% )

@SomeKindOfFloppyWeirdo

I don’t think any of those things said. However, I do think it’s important to recognise that - thankfully - only a small proportion of children are debilitated by long covid. I think it’s also important to recognise that the long covid diagnosis includes children with a post viral cough in the statistics. This is meant to be reassuring to the average parent. It does not diminish the suffering of those who are sadly very affected.

It never feels rare when it happens to you which I totally get.

@Mickarooni thanks Very true about it not feeling rare when it happens to you.

When I’m talking about ds I always try to say that I know it’s rare (because it is) and he’s been very unlucky. And I also agree that the reporting of long covid can be really frustrating as they do include relatively minor things like “had a cough 2 weeks after” or “developed a fear of llamas post infection” (ok that one’s not real but it may pop up one day!)

Then you get kids like ds, who has more serious complications. But when I post about his illness, people just remember the “minor” cases and think that’s all it is and I must be wildly exaggerating. They can’t seem to comprehend that there’s a spectrum, and it’s not all just a bit tired, or a bit anxious.

What I do massively have an issue with is people saying “it’s just psychosomatic” and “it’s caused by parents’ anxiety” as we’ve seen on this thread. That’s incredibly frustrating when you had the very physical symptoms and problems explained to you by a consultant who tells you they are ongoing (physical) complications of his covid infection. It’s like telling people the sky is blue and they’re screaming at me that it’s green. They haven’t been through it, they don’t know first hand, yet they’re adamant that they’re right. What can you do?

I’m not entirely sure when you are agreeing or disagreeing with me @herecomesthsun 😂

@SomeKindOfFloppyWeirdo

It’s such a shame that activist groups like ‘independent sage’ have got so many parents’ anxiety levels sky high unnecessarily.

“Activist group” 😂
Honestly, this just gets more and more ridiculous.

The more I see this kind of post, the more I’m convinced that the people downplaying/denying covid (in adults and in kids) are the ones suffering from sky high anxiety.

Asking for sensible mitigations and research does not equal “anxiety.”

Pretending that a problem doesn’t exist because you can’t cope with it is a far bigger sign of anxiety.

Activists.

It’s just weird.

They just want mitigations in schools.

Germany are putting ventilation units in every classroom, Boris Johnson is crossing his fingers because he likes a gamble and I also wonder if he thinks a bit of natural immunity wouldn’t go amiss.

He’s the extremist, not the scientists.

Well said @SomeKindOfFloppyWeirdo

2% is not remotely rare - given that our children are all about to catch it when the school year starts, frankly I'm concerned by that 2%.

I'm also extremely sceptical about the study's validity - it relies on parents continuing to log their children's symptoms in the app (which is not to do with long Covid specifically but to do with Covid) and if they stop logging them, they have counted that as the long Covid ending. Personally I would not bother logging my child's symptoms on it forever, and I doubt many people would as there is no particular benefit to doing it on that platform (the Zoe app). I fear this means it is likely to be a significant underestimate.

@unim

If anything, this study is likely to be a significant overestimate as there is absolutely no evidence that any of these extended ailments are actually caused by covid.

[quote GreenLakes]@unim

If anything, this study is likely to be a significant overestimate as there is absolutely no evidence that any of these extended ailments are actually caused by covid.[/quote]
On the contrary, the link between having a virus and the risk of post-viral complications is widely accepted. This isn't something that is exclusive to Covid.

The thing that concerns me most are the reports of 'brain fog' in Long Covid sufferers.

I think this is pretty alarming particularly in light of research confirming that there is evidence of long-term cognitive decline in people confirmed have had Covid, which is evident even in those who were not hospitalised: www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00324-2/fulltext

(This study has a huge sample size by the way)

@FionaShrewsbury That sentence is in the introduction and sets the scene for why this research was necessary and what approach they took to addressing it.

Check out the "Findings" section rather than the introduction. These are the headline findings from the abstract but you can also look at the longer conclusion at the end of the research:

"People who had recovered from COVID-19, including those no longer reporting symptoms, exhibited significant cognitive deficits versus controls when controlling for age, gender, education level, income, racial-ethnic group, pre-existing medical disorders, tiredness, depression and anxiety. The deficits were of substantial effect size for people who had been hospitalised (N = 192), but also for non-hospitalised cases who had biological confirmation of COVID-19 infection (N = 326). Analysing markers of premorbid intelligence did not support these differences being present prior to infection. Finer grained analysis of performance across sub-tests supported the hypothesis that COVID-19 has a multi-domain impact on human cognition."

This study itself analyses a huge dataset.

[quote GreenLakes]**@unim

If anything, this study is likely to be a significant overestimate as there is absolutely no evidence that any of these extended ailments are actually caused by covid.[/quote]
I’m not sure how you can state that with any certainty. Ds had covid, then Kawasaki syndrome/mis-c, and still has symptoms a year + on. He’s under a consultant who can clearly see differences/damage that has been caused by the original covid infection. His opinion would seem to disagree with yours.

Or have you mistaken all long covid symptoms as a bit of a fatigue or a cough? Again it bears saying that there is a spectrum from very mild to more severe. Dismissing those (thankfully very rare) severe cases serves what purpose exactly? Nobody’s saying every case is or will be severe, so there’s surely no need to be so dismissive.

Also completely agree with @unim that post viral complications after a viral infection are hardly rare (although sadly under-treated) so why so people find it so improbable that this virus can also trigger post viral complications is baffling.

@SomeKindOfFloppyWeirdo

I don’t think anyone is denying that a small number of people do suffer prolonged symptoms from covid and that a very small number suffer severe after effects.

The issue comes when people try to use these isolated cases to justify things like school closures or extended restrictions that themselves cause significantly more harm to more DC.

@GreenLakes

I’m not sure how these two statements of yours align, but it is very very late

“I don’t think anyone is denying that a small number of people do suffer prolonged symptoms from covid and that a very small number suffer severe after effects.”
vs
“there is absolutely no evidence that any of these extended ailments are actually caused by covid.”

Anyway.

I do understand that school closures and lockdowns are damaging in their own way. However, without some basic mitigations the risk is that those small numbers get bigger and bigger. At this point honestly I’d settle for better ventilation in schools and other confined spaces - something some other countries have managed to achieve without any great fuss. Yes, it’s not perfect and it won’t reduce cases by 100%, but any reduction is useful. That, plus vaccinations for vulnerable children, and for all 12+ would also be hugely effective.

The current plan of “letting it rip” through kids risks raising covid/covid complications from “rare” to “less rare” which I’m sure most parents would rather avoid.

And while I understand that a lot of people are very desperate for an end to lockdowns and restrictions, it would be great if they could raise that without throwing ill children under the bus by claiming that long covid is “just psychosomatic” “no evidence (their symptoms) are caused by covid” “they’re over exaggerating”, especially when that’s not at all the actual medical opinion.

It would be pretty shit anywhere, but on a parenting forum it’s pretty disgusting to see.

I think it is quite simplistic to think that the alternative to 'letting it rip' is school closures and extended restrictions.

There are a wide array of risk mitigations that can be used to make schools safe for children and staff - in the Republic of Ireland they are providing CO2 monitors to primary and secondary schools to check air quality and advice on what to do if it goes above recommended limits.

Basically, it's lazy to think we can't do anything to reduce the risks for our children. Other countries are investing in better ventilation, air quality monitoring, new types of testing that are less invasive like the ones where you pool saliva from groups etc.