Based on 40 studies re 12,424 kids, the pooled prevalence of Long Covid was 23.36%
Neurologic Sx were found in 13.51% and psychiatric Sx in 12.30%. Nearly one quarter of pediatric Covid cases suffered multisystemic Long Covid, even at 1 yr after C+.
www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/1...
Concentration difficulties in #LongCovidKids
In a review of Long Covid Sx prevalence in 19,426 children, concentration difficulties were reported up to 81% of children, headache up to 80%, fatigue up to 87%, and sleep disturbance up to 63%.
www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/1...
72% increased risk of new-onset Type 1 diabetes within 6 months of Covid infection in children compared with those with non-Covid respiratory infections.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
A study from one of the greatest sources of Long Covid minimization, NIH RECOVER, extrapolated that 10-20% of pediatric Covid cases result in Long Covid, with some studies showing a prevalence as high as 63%.
publications.aap.org/pediatrics/...
Kids born during pandemic have significantly reduced verbal, motor, & overall cognitive performance compared to pre-pandemic, & skills have continued to decline.
Neuroimaging shows reduced brain white matter development compared to those born 2011–2019.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
74.2% of hospitalized children with neurological symptoms had acute brain findings
Brain MRI following the onset of Covid's neurological symptoms in children showed acute necrotizing encephalopathy, encephalitis, and hippocampal atrophy.
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38538753/
FDG-PET shows similar brain hypometabolism in kids as in adults with Long Covid.
The affected regions are critical for memory, emotion regulation, and learning.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
Here's a short list of studies regarding some of the impacts and prevalences in #LongCovidKids science.
If you have others, please add them.
to persuade ppl with political rhetoric instead of any legitimate scientific or factual basis.
link.springer.com/article/10....
The authors then opine re chattel slavery, colonial-era smallpox transmission along slave trade networks, the "capitalist organization of production and reproduction", embodiment theory, and more in pathetically transparent attempts...
and known measurement and integrity problems.
For the study's own analysis, they pulled a bait and switch and conducted it on gay, bisexual, "something else," transgender, and genderqueer respondents - not just transgender.
Speaking of agenda, next up: An Intersectional Analysis of Long Covid Prevalence.
This study touts a Long Covid prevalence of a whopping 48.2% for transgender people, which again based on unreliable HPS data with no confidence intervals, no statistical test, on a survey with a 5–6% response rate
Comparing these two figures as though they measure the same thing is methodologically indefensible. It's indicative of dishonest propaganda and an agenda, not facts.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
Except these numbers are not comparable. The general population estimate comes from the Australian Institute of Health & Welfare literature review, which synthesized clinical and population-level data.
The 37% comes from an unvalidated, single-question self-report survey in a convenience sample 🤡.
49 out of 132 people who reported having had Covid answered "yes" to long-term health consequences...this one survey question is the paper's entire basis for their claim of 37% trans vs 5–10% general population estimate.
Next: Disruption of gender-affirming health care, and COVID-19 illness, testing, and vaccination among trans Australians during the pandemic: a cross-sectional survey.
The 37% prevalence Long Covid in transgender ppl is the paper's most-cited claim, and it's built on sand.
The study also found that gender-affirming hormone therapy was not associated with Long Covid risk. No main effect. No interaction with gender identity. So the authors' sex-hormone hypothesis totally crashed and burned, too.
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...
The paper is very deceitfully structured so that most readers never make the connection between the disparaity of actual % prevalence being totally in line with the general population's. Nothing special, no higher risk, just the authors' very obvious propagandic trans agenda.
Someone who sees just the abstract walks away thinking trans people face elevated Long Covid risk. They do not.
Someone who reads the conclusion walks away thinking targeted interventions are urgently needed for trans ppl. They are not.
So why does their conclusion call for trans-specific Long Covid surveillance, targeted prevention, and community interventions as though a higher prevalence exists for trans ppl, when they just proved that it does not?
Long Covid in Transgender and Gender Nonbinary People in the United States. First red flag: astroturf JD Davids.
The paper found that trans people have a ~10% prevalence of Long Covid. Which is the same prevalence as everyone else in the world. Which their paper admits to, and even cites.
Be very clear: this Long Covid thread is not actually about trans people. They are just the next demographic to be exploited and used by a network engaged in unending academic fraud and lies about Long Covid.
Onto the studies. ↓
It goes without saying that this is being propulgated by govt-sponsored MECFS astroturfs that have been lying about Long Covid science and stealing Long Covid resources from an extremely disabled and vulnerable patient population that literally has no legitimate representation anywhere on earth.
We are suddenly awash in Long Covid trans narrative, have you noticed?
The nonprofit Long Covid Kids is targeting children with it in their new graphic novel series.
"Advocates and allies" are making public stmts citing high trans prevalences that simply do not exist.
Let's review the studies.
Understatement!
"Gender Identity vs. Long Covid" ???
Long Covid Kids, a UK nonprofit, publishes a graphic novel aimed at kids and teens called "Living With Long Covid, A Young Person's Guide".
Shows them making a choice between an appt for Long Covid, or an appt for Gender Identity. Guess which one wins.
Those who define -only they decide what, and who, gets to exist in the discourse.
What has no true name has no accurate tally, no place in policy, no budget, no useful trials. It is invisible to the systems that allocate resources.
This is, and always has been, the fight.
Considering the skyrocketing levels of death, sickness, opportunistic infections, brain damages, disablement, heart attacks, strokes, cancers, rapid dementias, and we have generations of physically & cognitively disabled youth. Only traitors to humanity collude to bury all this.
There is no cooperating with those crafting the lies and stealing our resources without sacrificing Long Covid science, our lives, our children's futures.
If the past six years has proved anything, it is this. Brutally. Repeatedly.
This is why scientific fraud isn't just academic. The illness name and definition IS the treatment pathway.
The wrong label means awareness, funding, research, treatments, and medical care are actively routed away from scientific fact and from the help you need to survive.
