Editorial from @washingtonpost.com. Re: the NASEM studies on #LongCOVID: "These studies are early warnings in what will probably be a long process. The nation must prepare to cope accurately and compassionately with a wave of illness and impairment that might come."
wapo.st/3z3j3DZ
At this point I’m persuaded there’s got to be someone on the editorial board with a personal connection; it’s just too improbable that they would otherwise keep doing such a consistently superior job on this. You don’t happen to know who that would be, do you?
Has she said she has LC? Other reporters at the Post do, but my guess is this is a more immediate connection, like an editorial board member who has LC themselves, or has a seriously affected child or spouse. Sadly it’s uncommon for even a v sick acquaintance to motivate this kind of sustained attn.
She has and has been pretty open about. Don’t disagree that is a real possibility too. I would guess there are a bunch of factors pushing this. There are also people out there that believe it is an important issue, so maybe for a change they are in a place of power.
Trouble you for a link to where she says she has it? I’ve never seen her say that, including just now looking through tweets mentioning Long Covid or LC over the past year; closest was in Dec telling someone they have “zero idea” if she does. If it’s smthg she’s shared tho, I’m interested to know.
I see why this makes sense, but all the information necessary to draw this conclusion is openly available, and I feel like drawing a personal connection from the author to long COVID may not help their authority, given the way that folks with long COVID are viewed by denialists.
