I had COVID in March 2020, and it took several months to recover - chest tightness and slight difficulty breathing being the main unending symptom.
The key for me was moving out of a lockdown country (Australia) to a non-lockdown country (Ukraine), and stopping wearing masks (just wearing a face shield). The psychological impact of freedom lead to an almost immediate improvement in my wellbeing.
It would be interesting to compare COVID survivors in lockdown and non-lockdown states in the USA. The theory could be that the social isolation, stress, reduced Vitamin D, and poorer diet of people in lockdown contribute to poorer outcomes long-term.
All of the evidence seems to more immediately point to "it's all in your head". That's still real, but it isn't "COVID long haul", it's just "things kinda suck right now for a lot of people, and some manifest symptoms because of it."
What would you say the epistemic status of this is?
>The key for me was moving out of a lockdown country (Australia) to a non-lockdown country (Ukraine), and stopping wearing masks (just wearing a face shield). The psychological impact of freedom lead to an almost immediate improvement in my wellbeing.
The link to Vit-D deficiency and worse covid outcomes is by now incredibly well-supported in the literature.
That anybody thinks a lockdown is good advice is just evidence that, yes, the media is effective at controlling what appears to most to be most minds (though that's not clear--most folks I talk to think covid is mild and the policy response insane).
Best advice is the same your grandma might give you: To be healthy, eat well, go outside for fresh air and exercise.
Instead, we're all supposed to think that the best response is waiting for Bill Gates to put just the right chemicals into a syringe to save mankind.
>The link to Vit-D deficiency and worse covid outcomes is by now incredibly well-supported in the literature.
Twitter followers I consider "in-the-know", as well as a quick Google search, says this is nonsense. Where do you get that this assertion is well-supported?
I see your response paints me as some anti-vaxxer. Why would you think that?
My kids, my wife, and myself are all accinated against polio and other illnesses.
Those vaccines a) Are real vaccines that actually stop getting the illness AND transmitting it and b) Have been battle-tested over decades and their long-term impacts and side-effects are well-understood.
I'm not anti-vaxx.
I'm against rushed, misleadingly-marketed vaccines that seem to have no impact on the actual transmission of the virus, based on every company's claims, that have been tested for months when prior to this widespread vaccine injections required close to a decade of study for approval.
This is a rushed gene therapy medical treatment for a disease that kills less than 0.4% of people under the age of 75.
The link to Vit-D deficiency and worse covid outcomes is by now incredibly well-supported in the literature.
But Vitamin D deficiency is also correlated with non healthy life styles in general. So basically all that's saying is if you're living an unhealthy lifestyle there is a better chance that covid will be worse for you if you get it.
So your response to that is some experimental medical treatment that is still undergoing phase3 FDA trials?
Why isn't the very obvious response a massive, tax-incentivized campaign to increase the health and immune system of Americans and the world in general?
Why instead of $billions to Moderna and Pfizer are we not creating world-leading tax systems that monetarily incentivize the buildup of our nation's immune system?
The key for me was moving out of a lockdown country (Australia) to a non-lockdown country (Ukraine), and stopping wearing masks (just wearing a face shield). The psychological impact of freedom lead to an almost immediate improvement in my wellbeing.
It would be interesting to compare COVID survivors in lockdown and non-lockdown states in the USA. The theory could be that the social isolation, stress, reduced Vitamin D, and poorer diet of people in lockdown contribute to poorer outcomes long-term.