Hacker News Reader

Put another way, according to Johns Hopkins, there have been a total of 24,079,325 reported cases of infection in the UK. That means a smidge more than 8% of infected people are suffering from prolonged symptoms as they are defined in this study.

That is statistically significant, but not exactly overwhelming by my personal yardstick of whether or not I'd gamble money on it. Not exactly scientific, I know.

View on HN

I may have misunderstood one or both of your numerical dismissals, then.

As I read it, your first post suggested this was a blip, similar to some subset of the 8000 people in a village that thought they had increased cancer risk from a fission power plant accident.

I wasn't sure what you meant by 'paltry numbers', given the study was across 2.5m patients.

This post is now saying that (extrapolating) the 2 million people in the UK with long COVID are not compelling to you, either because you believe there's no connection to COVID, or because that's not many people -- I'm not sure which?

What percent of your total net worth would you gamble on a 92% chance in your favor btw? Genuinely kinda curious because to me 8% is an incredibly high chance for something that would negatively affect you for the rest of your life.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com