First Opinion is STAT’s platform for interesting, illuminating, and maybe even provocative articles about the life sciences writ large, written by biotech insiders, health care workers, researchers, and others.
To encourage robust, good-faith discussion about issues raised in First Opinion essays, STAT publishes selected Letters to the Editor received in response to them. You can submit a Letter to the Editor here, or find the submission form at the end of any First Opinion essay.
“Long Covid feels like a gun to my head,” by Rachel Hall-Clifford
Thank you for this. I’m a 65-year-old woman who’s Covid cautious and wears a mask in public places (yes, in 2024). I’ve never had Covid as far as I know, and I try to keep up with the research. I feel like everybody would be more cautious if they read this article on long Covid, because it helps to really understand the horrible ways that a mild case of Covid can affect your life in ways that are unimaginable.
— Hildy Hogate
“I’m a hypochondriac. Here’s how the health care system needs to deal with people like me,” by Hal Rosenbluth
Health anxiety is the less biased term, rather than hypochondria with all its comic baggage.
Though the writer likes full body scans for himself and they suit his particular fears, many, many people with health anxiety, including me, wouldn’t get within 10 feet of a full body scan. It would be the opposite of reassuring.
Even if it did reassure for the moment, anyone with health anxiety knows reassurance is short-lived. A scan done in, say, January, might reassure a non-anxious person for the next six months. But it would be the rare person with health anxiety who would feel reassured for more than a couple of weeks.
And why on earth would you want to create a separate billing code for this, which would, without question, be used to pick out, stigmatize, and limit access to medical care? That doesn’t help patients, it soothes and enriches insurers, who would undoubtedly limit access to care based on a scan. How long would it take before you called to make an appointment with your doctor and were told sorry, your insurance won’t cover an office visit — your scan said you have no problems?
The writer’s personal experience, psychology, and taste for scans are just that, personal. They don’t generalize to most, or even many, of those who suffer from health anxiety.
— Maria Perry
“NIH needs reform and restructuring, key Republicans committee chairs say,” by Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Robert B. Aderholt
I agree with the authors that NIH needs reform. I was an athletic, otherwise healthy person who was struck down and disabled by long Covid in January 2022. For over two years, I’ve watched life pass me by as NIH has fumbled the $1.15 billion allocated to it by Congress to study and treat long Covid. This initiative, known as RECOVER, has failed to publish any research that furthers our understanding of the underlying cause of long Covid and the vast majority of clinical trials they’ve launched are for drugs that people have already tried and found unhelpful.
Perhaps NIH would not have bungled the long Covid funding had it not completely ignored other post viral diseases, namely myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) for the past 40 years. ME receives only $15 million a year — the most underfunded disease per patient burden at the NIH.
NIH should reevaluate how it allocates funding to diseases and base allocations on objective patient burdens. HIV, a disease with treatments that allow people with it to live mostly normal lives, receives $3.3 billion annually through NIH. Meanwhile, ME patients are disabled, have no approved treatments, and suffer a higher patient burden. Covid long haulers are suffering the same fate, many struck down as first wavers in March of 2020 are still disabled and sick as ever over four years later. Despite this, there is still no yearly allocation for long Covid in NIH’s baseline budget, as funding has only ever come from one time appropriations. NIH should right-size funding for ME and long Covid and start taking these diseases seriously.
— John Bolecek, long Covid patient
“Addressing health care workers’ trauma can help fight burnout,” by Sadie Elisseou
Thank you for writing this essay on the trauma and burnout that are all too common among today’s health care workforce. I applaud you for underscoring the importance of trauma-informed organizations and the critical value of workplaces that are safe, supportive, and flexible.
As a nurse educator and researcher, I have come to understand the important role of resilience in the work that nurses do. Considering two-thirds of nurses (65%) experience burnout, resilience-building skills are critical to mitigating nurse exhaustion and preserving our nation’s nursing pipeline. If actions are not taken to better protect the physical and mental health of our healthcare workforce, patient care will suffer. Lawmakers must take notice.
Some efforts in Congress have been successful. Congress has introduced legislation to reauthorize the Dr. Lorna Breen Provider Protection Act, bipartisan legislation that recognizes the need for mental health resources and support programs for healthcare professionals. Since its original enactment, this act has been instrumental in funding grant programs for mental health training, education, peer support, and crisis intervention services.
The reauthorization of this measure would expand grants to more than 200,000 other types of health care settings as well as renew the focus on reducing administrative burden for health care workers. While this bill is not a perfect solution, it does provide needed to support for a workforce that is understaffed, overworked, and in need to relief.
I urge Congress to finish the job and fully reauthorize the Dr. Lorna Breen Provider Protection Act this year.
— Stephanie Turner, R.N., Ed.D., M.S.N., ATI Nursing Education