Why Are So Many Children Getting Long COVID?
It's been more than five years since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, although millions of Americans, including children, are still affected by it today.
More than one million Americans died due to the virus, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), while many were floored by the infection for weeks or even months.
Others developed long COVID, which is recognized as a collection of symptoms that last three months or longer after initial COVID symptoms appear.
This can affect many systems in the body and result in a wide range of health complications and symptoms.
A study by Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) last year found that up to 5.8 million American children now have long COVID.
The authors wrote that this means between 10 to 20 percent of children who tested positive with COVID-19 went on to develop the condition.
Their findings suggest that long COVID may have surpassed asthma-which around 5 million youngsters have-as the most common chronic condition experienced by American children.
However, experts told Newsweek that more detailed research is needed to determine the prevalence of the condition, and discussed why millions of children now have ongoing health complications and symptoms post-COVID infection.
Children of all ages can develop long COVID and typical symptoms can vary between age groups.
Poor appetite, sleep issues and respiratory symptoms such as a cough are usually common in infants, toddlers and preschool-aged children with the condition, while school-aged children are also likely to have neurological symptoms like trouble focusing, fear of specific things or feeling lightheaded, the medical journal site JAMA Network reported.
Some children may also experience back or neck pain, headache, stomach pain, vomiting and even behavioral changes.
Adolescents may also notice a change or loss in smell or taste and experience pain, fatigue-related symptoms or trouble with their memory, JAMA Network said.
It is difficult to pin down exactly how common long COVID really is among those aged under 18 as "prevalence varies between studies due to different clinical definitions, follow-up period and survey methods used," Dr. Akiko Iwasaki, director of the Center for Infection and Immunity at the Yale School of Medicine, told Newsweek.
However, she added that "the most robust studies" collectively suggest the number of children who get infected with COVID and then develop long COVID "is higher than the prevalence of asthma in children in the U.S."
Also discussing the study, Dr. Lauren Grossman, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, told Newsweek: "The number of children under 18 with asthma ranges from 4.9 million to 6 million depending on the source so it's not an incorrect statement to say that there are more or at least the same number of children with asthma as there are with long COVID."
Many children are also going "unrecognized and unsupported," Dr. Rachel Gross, a professor in the department of pediatrics at NYU Langone Health, told Newsweek.
She added that this means "identifying long COVID in children, especially young children, can be difficult due to rapid developmental changes and communication limitations."
However, Dr. Gerald Teague, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, said that "there are too few prospective studies to compare estimates of long COVID to asthma in children."
"We need to come to consensus on how to precisely diagnose long COVID in children first," he told Newsweek, adding that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the federal government should "allocate more funding to antiviral research in children to help clear these confusing issues."
Gross also said that the age differences in long COVID symptoms "support that a one-size fits all approach will likely not be sufficient to screen for, identify, and treat children with long COVID."
One reason long COVID continues to affect millions of American children could be related to vaccinations, according to Grossman. "As vaccinations help prevent long COVID and vaccinations were not available to pediatric patients until long after they were for adults, fewer children had protection," she said.
She added that the first vaccines were given to adults in December 2020, while children aged 5 to 11 only received their first vaccination in October 2021.
Teague also said that studies have found that the original COVID strain in 2020 was far more likely to result in patients developing long COVID, while more recent strains were "not as likely to be associated with symptoms."
Few children being vaccinated amid the first, more symptom-inducing strain of the virus may therefore have contributed to the higher rates of long COVID.
Child COVID vaccinations have also recently come into the spotlight as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has been vocal in his distrust of the mRNA COVID vaccine, announced last month that the CDC will no longer recommend COVID vaccines for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women."
Grossman added that Paxlovid, the antiviral medication used to treat COVID infection, was first authorized in December 2021, but only for those aged 12 and over, or those who weighed more than 88 lbs., meaning younger children did not have access to medication.
It is important to note, however, that "the prevalence for long COVID in children appears to be just as high in adults," Iwasaki said.
"This suggests that children are not immune to developing long COVID, and that their immune system is also susceptible to being derailed by the virus," she added.
Iwasaki said that this could mean that COVID infection "might become persistent or trigger autoimmune diseases in children," and that there could be "other viral infections that happen during childhood that impact long COVID susceptibility."
However, she said that more research is needed to better understand the underlying mechanisms of long COVID in youngsters.
"We need more awareness so that parents and pediatricians can recognize the signs of long COVID in children better," Iwasaki said.
"The relationship between children, their caregivers, and pediatricians is vital to identify and eventually treat this under-recognized condition," Gross said.
Grossman said that establishing pediatric-specializing long COVID clinics was vital as currently there are "very few," and that promoting "full vaccination" was also important.
While more robust studies are beginning to be done on the issue, it is still difficult to determine the overall impact and severity of long COVID on America's children.
Related Articles
What RFK Jr. Has Said About COVID VaccinesCOVID-19 NB 1.8.1 Variant: Symptoms To Watch For As Virus SurgesRobert F. Kennedy Jr. Changes His Mind About COVID VaccineMAHA Influencer Slams Trump Admin COVID Vaccine Update-'Really Unfortunate'
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
OSU falls victim to budget cuts, putting a damper on scientific research
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) — The awarding of an OSU microfluidics research fund of $45 million has been called off by the Trump administration, leaving researchers fumbling for options. Microfluidics, the scientific study of the behavior of liquid on a microscopic level, is a recently established field and is hoped to aid in the medical realm as well as the manufacturing of semiconductors, a partially conductive component of many day-to-day electronic devices. The grant's cancellation has been a source of upset for researchers, but OSU is already looking ahead to future opportunities. Anti-ICE protests escalate outside Southwest Portland facility 'While we are disappointed in the notification of the EDA award cancellation for CorMic [Corvallis Microfluidics Tech Hub], we fully intend to participate in the EDA's next Notice of Funding Opportunity and remain well positioned to further national security interests as a global leader in microfluidics for semiconductor manufacturing, ' Tom Weller, Gaulke Professor and Head said. 'Oregon State University will continue to work alongside HP and other partners to further the commercialization of new microfluidics-connected technologies for semiconductor manufacturing, biotechnology, and advanced materials manufacturing.' This is not an isolated incident, with Trump having attempted to cut billions in allocated federal funding to scientific research since the beginning of his current term. White House spokesperson Kush Desai said, 'The Trump administration is spending its first few months reviewing the previous administration's projects, identifying waste, and realigning our research spending to match the American people's priorities and continue our innovative dominance.' Universities are getting hit with the full force of these budget cuts, with biomedical research being classified as 'waste.' Just in February, the National Institutes of Health proposed cutting billions of dollars to OHSU research looking at cancer and heart disease, among other afflictions. These cuts were immediately met with lawsuits from, but not limited to, the Association of American Universities and 22 state attorneys general. These lawsuits are still in progress. The Association of American Universities' lawsuit called the NIH cuts 'flagrantly unlawful' and expressed concern that 'our country will lose its status as the destination for solving the world's biggest health problems.' Scientists of the NIH itself have begun to speak out, publicly disagreeing with the institute's actions, claiming that the cuts 'undermine the NIH mission.' Cuts to scientific research are becoming a recurring source of contention as Trump's second term continues. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - We're cancer doctors. Here's why Medicare Advantage fails America's elderly.
'It's nothing,' Tom, a retired firefighter from rural Texas, thought when he had persistent stomach pain. After shedding 30 pounds in three weeks, his family physician ordered a CT scan. Tom was not concerned — after all, the 65-year-old had gotten Medicare Advantage earlier that year. Like millions, Tom switched his insurance after he was solicited by a broker who promised low premiums and a gift card. Absent from the sales pitch was the fact that Medicare Advantage plans — privately run and separate from government-funded traditional Medicare — often delay and deny coverage. One of us met Tom nearly three months after his CT scan, and his doctor discovered the abdominal mass. The job as the first oncologist he had been able to see after months of jumping through hoops was to get initial scans, identify an in-network provider, wait for further referral and approval processes and finally schedule and complete a biopsy. The delays became a death knell. Tom was diagnosed with Stage 3 pancreatic cancer. Tom's first question was, 'It's going to be fine, right?' Despite the urge to reassure him, Tom's life and treatment options were not up to a doctor. They were up to his insurance. The same insurance that delayed urgent testing and care. By definition, Medicare Advantage is meant to support elderly medical care and increase efficiencies; in function, it is a business model that allows the American government to decrease its liability for sick seniors. Instead of absorbing and managing costs, the responsibility is outsourced to third-party operators, such as UnitedHealth Group, Humana and CVS Health. While Medicare Advantage provides excellent coverage if you never get sick, this insurance can quickly become a precursor to medical bankruptcy if the patient develops a deadly disease, a highly probable outcome when you consider that nearly 40 percent of Americans get cancer in their lifetime. After nearly two decades of experimentation and $450 billion of taxpayer money, Medicare Advantage has proven porous in terms of corruption, fraud and abuse. Yet, 32.8 million elderly Americans (54 percent of the eligible Medicare population) are currently enrolled in Medicare Advantage. In 2023 alone, Medicare Advantage plans fully or partially denied 3.2 million prior authorization requests. No one, especially among folks facing the daily drudgery of fighting cancer, truly understands how the cogs within the insurance machine work. Few of our elderly patients fight the goliath institution, and many succumb to poorer health outcomes in their quest for lifesaving treatment. Last year, countrywide and across disease groups, 79 percent of patients who experienced a delay or denial of coverage paid out of pocket for medication at least sometimes. Unsurprisingly, more than 100 million Americans are in medical debt. Of those who appealed between 2019 and 2023, over 80 percent were approved, implying that the initial claims were valid. This game of attrition directly contradicts Medicare Advantage's promise to provide efficient, patient-centered healthcare. These denials are not just medically dangerous because they enable deadly diseases to progress unchecked. They are also emotionally erosive. Daily, we see patients shrink in the face of denials, unable to emotionally navigate the complex Medicare system and the immense pain, isolation and depression resulting from this behemoth that stands between their disease and their hope to be free of it. During one of Tom's chemo visits, with thousands of dollars worth of IVs in his veins, his skin pale and translucent, he realized he was begging his insurance at every turn to support him. Stories like Tom's reveal the truth: Medicare Advantage is unapologetically failing its elderly cancer patients. Sick American seniors deserve more than insurance coverage in name only. We advise our patients to avoid Medicare Advantage. The better choice is traditional Medicare, plus a secondary or supplemental insurance. Often, people do not enroll in supplemental insurance because they do not understand its importance, believe they will never get sick, miss the deadline for approval without a medical exam (you must do this within three months before or after your 65th birthday), or think it is too expensive. Although supplemental insurance costs nearly $500 a month (exact amounts vary based on age and income), choosing this add-on — and paying roughly $6,000 a year — is much more affordable than Medicare Advantage's yearly out-of-pocket (potentially adding up to $8,500) and fighting for approvals for basic treatment. On Medicare Advantage, Tom quickly reached his maximum yearly out-of-pocket of $8,500, but then it reset on Jan. 1. After four months of treatment, he was responsible for paying $17,000 for 16 months of care, on top of his insurance premiums, simply to receive standard care. Of course, if you are one of the fortunate few to have never experienced illness — and we hope you are — Medicare Advantage can be a cheaper option. The question is, how can we make Medicare Advantage advantageous for the vulnerable? There is a bipartisan opportunity to change the narrative around this insurance model. During his confirmation hearing as the head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Mehmet Oz criticized Medicare Advantage insurers for some of their practices. Strategic change — omitting out-of-pocket costs for cancer patients, curbing insurance companies' rights to deny claims submitted by doctors and speeding up the process — along with more rigorous oversight of the program are worthwhile goals the Trump administration and Congress should take on. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many issues, we believe we can all agree that people like Tom — and the millions of other Americans enrolled in Medicare Advantage — deserve comprehensive and just care. Dr. Pramod Pinnamaneni, MD, MBA, and Dr. Nitya Thummalachetty, DrPH, are founders of the Nau Project, a start-up dedicated to helping everyday Americans navigate the complexities of our healthcare system. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Murdoch's Paper Unloads on RFK Jr. Over Axing Vaccine Board
A Rupert Murdoch-owned paper ripped into Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Tuesday for gutting the nation's top vaccine advisory panel. The Wall Street Journal published a scathing op-ed a day after Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic, announced the firing spree at the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) in the paper itself. The ACIP reports to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine efficacy. The Secretary of Health and Human Services said he was 'retiring' all 17 members of the advisory committee on vaccines in a 'bold step' to help restore 'public trust.' The move raised alarm bells at a time when health experts fear vaccine skepticism is fueling the nation's largest measles outbreak in around 25 years. 'Most of ACIP's members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines,' Kennedy wrote, hinting at a plot to push vaccines on Americans. Murdoch's editorial board hit back: 'Mr. Kennedy's beef seems to be that the committee's members know something about vaccines and may have been involved in their research and development.' 'How does he define 'substantial'?' the board asked. The board noted that trial doctors get small payments, typically less than their salaries, from vaccine makers to assist with clinical trials. But 'these trials are double-blinded, meaning doctors don't know which volunteers receive the vaccine or placebo so there's no financial incentive to tilt the data in favor of manufacturers,' the board said. Any conflicts of interest among the committee were also 'honestly handled,' the board said. Kennedy said in a separate announcement that 'a clean sweep is necessary to reestablish public confidence in vaccine science.' 'ACIP new members will prioritize public health and evidence-based medicine. The Committee will no longer function as a rubber stamp for industry profit-taking agendas,' he added. Since joining the Trump administration in January, Kennedy, who is leading the Trump administration's 'Make America Healthy Again' initiative has doubled down on conspiracy theories around shots, including that the measles jab contain 'aborted fetus debris.' 'The MMR vaccine contains millions of particles that are derived from fetal tissue, millions of fragments of human DNA from aborted fetuses,' Kennedy told NBC News' Tom Llamas last month. Kennedy was referring to the combined Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine. Vaccines do not contain aborted fetuses, fetal cells, fetal DNA, or fetal debris, according to the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. The rubella component of the vaccine is developed from a fetal cell line known as WI-38 that originally came from the lung tissue of an elective abortion performed more than five decades ago. No new fetal issue has been used since, and cells used today are thousands of times removed from the original source. Health experts are alarmed by Kennedy's suggestions that the measles jab is unsafe, a claim which contradicts decades of research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The World Health Organization declared measles eliminated from the United States in 2000 due to the success of vaccination efforts. International travel and growing vaccine hesitancy are thought to be behind its resurgence. The American Medical Association has said Kennedy's decision to gut ACIP undermines 'trust and upends a transparent process that has saved countless lives.' Kennedy wrote in his op-ed for the Journal that ACIP's new members 'won't directly work for the vaccine industry.' 'They will exercise independent judgment, refuse to serve as a rubber stamp, and foster a culture of critical inquiry—unafraid to ask hard questions.' ACIP is set to hold its next meeting on June 25 at the CDC's headquarters.
