Why Are So Many Children Getting Long COVID?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
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.
File photo: a mother holds her daughter while she has a COVID-19 test done in a clinic in Washington.
File photo: a mother holds her daughter while she has a COVID-19 test done in a clinic in Washington.
Carolyn Kaster/AP
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.
Prevalence of Long COVID in Children
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."
Why Do So Many Children Have 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Arkansas approved to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits for soda, candy
USDA Sec. Brooke Rollins (left) stands next to Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders as she announces Arkansas' request to exclude soda and candy from SNAP benefits on April 15, 2025. (Ainsley Platt/Arkansas Advocate) Candy and sodas are coming off the menu for SNAP recipients in Arkansas, and rotisserie chickens are taking their place. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins officially approved a waiver to allow Arkansas to ban its SNAP recipients from using their benefits to purchase certain types of food on Tuesday. Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders made the waiver request to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, when Rollins visited Little Rock in April. The waiver will take effect July 1, 2026. Sanders specifically asked the federal government to allow Arkansas to restrict SNAP participants from purchasing certain types of food and drink deemed unhealthy with their benefits, such as soda, juices with less than 50% natural juice and other 'unhealthy drinks,' along with 'confectionary products with flour and artificially sweetened candy.' In their place, Sanders requested that Arkansas SNAP recipients be allowed to purchase rotisserie chickens with their food benefits. Arkansas asks USDA to exclude soda, candy from state SNAP benefits In an emailed press release Tuesday, Sanders said the approval 'sends a clear message' that Arkansas stands with the Trump administration to tackle the 'chronic disease epidemic' in the U.S. 'Arkansas leads the nation in getting unhealthy, ultra-processed foods off food stamps and helping our most vulnerable citizens lead healthier lives,' Sanders said. The exclusion of soda and candy would not decrease overall SNAP benefits received by beneficiaries, Sanders said during Rollins' April visit, but would rather free up more of their benefits for healthier foods. Arkansas was one of the first states to request the junk food waiver. Nebraska was the first to receive approval on May 20. In a Monday night press release, the USDA said Rollins would host U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Indiana Gov. Mike Braun and Sanders for 'a discussion about President [Donald] Trump's government wide effort to Make America Healthy Again.' 'America's governors have proudly answered the call to innovate by improving nutrition programs, ensuring better choices while respecting the generosity of the American taxpayer,' the Sanders release quoted Rollins as saying. Since aligning himself with President Donald Trump last year after a failed presidential campaign, Kennedy has continued his criticisms of companies and foods he says contribute to Americans' poor health. It spawned the broader MAHA movement among conservatives, with GOP governors such as Sanders repeating Kennedy's warnings of a 'chronic disease epidemic' caused by food dyes and ultraprocessed foods. Sanders' waiver request was made as Arkansas legislators considered — and ultimately approved — legislation that requires the Arkansas Department of Human Services, which oversees SNAP in the state, to apply for a junk food waiver over the objections of Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, who said the requirement was a 'slippery slope in terms of debating what foods are healthy or not.' A better way to address poor health outcomes would be to address root causes such as poverty and access to medical care, Christin Harper, AACF's policy director told legislators in April. The food industry pushed back on Sanders' assertions that their products were driving a health crisis in April, with the National Confectioners Association calling the waiver 'misguided.' The NCA argued then that the 'candy purchasing patterns' of those who received SNAP benefits and those who didn't were 'basically equivalent.' The American Beverage Association also pushed back on the arguments Sanders made in April, saying at the time that granting the waiver 'won't make one ounce of difference on health.' The waiver decision comes after the USDA backed down on a demand to states that they provide a variety of personally-identifiable information on SNAP beneficiaries while lawsuits played out. Arkansas shares certain SNAP applicant numbers with federal government
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Biden's COVID czar hammers RFK Jr. over vaccine panel overhaul
Former White House COVID-19 response coordinator Ashish Jha, who served under former President Biden, criticized the decision by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to fire all 17 experts on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) vaccine panel. Kennedy announced the decision in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal on Monday, saying, 'A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science.' But in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Jha pushed back against Kennedy's reasoning. 'Look, what he said in his op-ed was a series of nonsense about a group of individuals, experts …who shape what vaccines, if any, are going to be available to the American people,' Jha said in the interview. 'So obviously this is very concerning,' he continued. 'We'll have to see who he appoints next. But this is a step in the wrong direction.' Jha said he is concerned about what the move foretells about the secretary's agenda on vaccines. Jha pointed to what he characterized as a lackluster response from the secretary to 'the worst measles outbreak of the last 25 years.' He also expressed concern regarding Kennedy's raising questions about vaccines causing autism, which Jha dismissed and said was 'settled science.' 'Then you put this in the middle of all of that,' Jha said, referring to the vaccine panel sweep, 'and what you have is a pretty clear picture that what Secretary Kennedy is trying to do is make sure that vaccines are not readily available to Americans, not just for kids, for the elderly.' 'He could go pretty far with this move, and I really am worried about where we're headed,' Jha continued. He said he's particularly concerned about the effect Kennedy's move will have on kids and whether they will continue having access to certain vaccines in the future. 'Kids rely on vaccines. I'm worried about whether the next generation of kids are going to have access to polio vaccines and measles vaccines. That's where we're heading. That's what we have to push back against.' Kennedy said in his op-ed that he was removing every member of the panel to give the Trump administration an opportunity to appoint its own members. Kennedy has long accused members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of having conflicts of interest, sparking concern among vaccine advocates that he would seek to install members who are far more skeptical of approving new vaccines. But Jha pushed back against criticism that the panel was all Biden-appointed experts, saying, 'When the Biden administration came in, almost all of the appointees had come from the first Trump administration.' 'That was fine because they were good people,' he said. 'They were experts. Right now, it's the same thing. The people he is firing are experts — like a nurse in Illinois who spent her entire career getting kids vaccinated, cancer doctors from Memorial Sloan Kettering — like these are really good people.' 'And generally, CDC has not worried about when were they appointed. The question is, are they good and are they conflict free.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
NIH Director Struggles To Defend His Own Plan To Slash $18 Billion In Medical Research
WASHINGTON ― National Institutes of Health director Jayanta Bhattacharya got a cool reception from Democratic and Republican senators on Tuesday as he defended his agency's budget request for 2026, which would slash billions in cutting-edge biomedical research on cancer, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes and other health conditions. NIH is considered the crown jewel of American science and the global leader in biomedical research and innovation. Senators in both parties are proud of its success and of their own roles in boosting its funding over the years in support of medical breakthroughs. So Bhattacharya had to know his budget request would land with a thud as he presented it to a Senate appropriations subcommittee. He kept trying to square two things that didn't make sense: that Trump is committed to preserving America's role as the leader in biomedical research, and that his proposed $18 billion in cuts to the agency next year ― or 40% of its entire budget ― won't hamper that. Senators didn't buy it. At times, Bhattacharya didn't seem to want to defend it, either. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who chairs the full Senate Appropriations Committee, called the administration's proposed cuts to NIH 'so disturbing.' 'It would undo years of congressional investment in NIH, and it would delay or stop effective treatments and cures from being developed for diseases,' Collins said. 'We also risk falling behind China and other countries that are increasing their investment in biomedical research.' In particular, she asked why the administration is calling for the cutting of funding by 40% for the National Institutes of Aging, which funds most Alzheimer's research, when it's been successfully developing breakthrough drugs and blood tests. Bhattacharya, without defending his own proposed cuts, said 'the intention' of the Trump administration is to lead the world in biomedical research, suggesting Congress could make a counteroffer and potentially propose more spending. 'The budget is a collaborative effort between the Congress and the administration,' he said. Collins simply replied, 'We look forward to working with you to remedy these problems and the deficiencies in the budget.' Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the appropriations panel, ripped the administration's 'catastrophic' cuts to NIH to date. She said Trump has so far forced out nearly 5,000 employees, prevented nearly $3 billion in grants from being awarded, and terminated nearly 2,500 grants totaling almost $5 billion for life-saving research. 'The Trump administration is already systematically dismantling the American biomedical research enterprise that is the envy of the world, throwing away billions in economic activity in every one of our states,' Murray fumed. 'This budget proposal would effectively forfeit our leadership in research innovation and competitiveness to China.' She tangled with Bhattacharya over one of dozens of clinical trials that have been halted due to frozen NIH funds: a 23-year research effort to develop an HIV vaccine. Scientists there are on 'the cusp of a functional cure for HIV,' she said, and now 6,000 people in that trial have been cut off from treatment. Bhattacharya jumped in to say he is 'absolutely committed' to supporting research on HIV. 'But you did terminate the HIV research at Fred Hutch that, again, was on the cusp of a treatment for 6,000 patients nationwide,' Murray replied, referring to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. 'You did do that,' she said, as they talked over each other. 'I'd have to get back to you on that,' said Bhattacharya. 'You did do that,' she repeated. After more back and forth, the NIH director said again, 'The budget request is a work of negotiation between Congress and the administration.' Minutes later, he said it yet again, as Murray pressed for details on how many fewer clinical trials there would be next year because of the Trump administration's proposed cuts. 'I'll say this,' Bhattacharya declared. 'The budget itself is a negotiation between Congress and the administration.' He said it several other times, too. In fact, it became clear this was the NIH director's go-to line for defending his own devastating budget request. It simultaneously allowed him to stand by his bosses ― Trump, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ― while not exactly arguing in support of its specific cuts. 'President Trump has committed that the U.S. be the leading nation in biomedicine in the 21st century,' he said at one point. 'I entirely support that goal.' 'Well, I do too, but it's hard to understand how we're going to get there when the budget slashes funding,' replied Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.). 'Particularly in critical areas of research where our most critical competitor, the Chinese, are increasing funding in those areas and we're slashing the budgets.' Bhattacharya didn't respond. It's possible he may not have agreed with some of his own budget's cuts. Bhattacharya certainly had a hand in crafting his agency's budget, but so did other officials at the White House and the Department of Health and Human Services. Before becoming NIH director in April, Bhattacharya was a professor of medicine, economics and health research policy at Stanford University. He knows how vital and highly esteemed NIH is, worldwide. Why not put it on Congress to save it? 'You say this is a collaborative effort, and you're absolutely right, and I encourage Congress to exert its authorities,' said Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kansas). 'If Congress were to provide additional dollars above and beyond the president's budget request, how would we as a committee and how would you as NIH recommend for us to prioritize that spending?' Bhattacharya said he's focused on the 'real health needs' of Americans, like diabetes and cancer, and on the 'need to think big' for advancing science. 'Again, the budget, it's a collaborative effort,' he said. 'But I think it's going to be important that we address the real problems in science and the real needs of the American people with whatever budget comes out. That's my job.' Moran redirected Bhattacharya back to the need for more funding at NIH. 'I assume that means we need more resources,' said the Republican senator. 'And that you would put them to good use. Is that accurate?' 'That's my job,' replied the NIH director.
