nostr:npub1hk4mlaam68ftq2fcrs0nkppn83h76njah5plwty3vpxc0f35zqcql0578k 

> You say "even if a study showed clearly".  In addition to casting doubt, this indicates both that you are unacquainted with how research accumulates into knowledge and that you have not, in fact, looked for such a study.

I am a COVID-19 research scientist who has been working on the disease for over 2 years now. Lets not go there with the personal attacks, it makes you look unprofessional and ignorant.

While there are lots of studies that show long-covid and talk about the odds, any honest scientist will tell you COVID is new and our data still very limited. No studies on long-term permanent effects are conclusive this early on in a disease.

> As a research scientist, I assume you are capable of doing a literature survey.  If you take the time to look for papers on sequelae prevalence in reinfection, you will find ample evidence supporting my statements.

Have and do, and yes there are studies that both support and reject many of your assumptions. As is to be expected with such a new disease where the data is still emerging. You can find studies to support almost any invalid assumption you want, the key is understanding the entire body of knowledge and weighing it accordingly.

The funny thing is with my 7 confirmed COVID cases if 1 in 5 was every single infection the chance of me not being permanently disabled would be statistically impossible. Yet here I am perfectly fine... That alone proves the 1 in 5 chance is not compounded across each infection naively.

nostr:npub1hcc5kv2zwcnlwdthxru8cf8avcetpet86n9ymtgpm897dvml6wwsgk4xws