Post by @datum@zeroes.ca

2026-08-01 18:14 UTC

Even if a complete neuron doesn't die, if a huge chunk of the synapses are destroyed, whatever that neuron was doing before, it's doing a fraction afterwards: a measurable, consistent, and symptom-correlated loss of dopamine nerve terminals averaging 18 percent across the long COVID group. with localized damage to areas that match Long COVID symptoms: “In other illnesses this magnitude of loss is associated with symptoms: loss in one region is associated with trouble with motivational energy problems, loss in another region is associated with some slowness of movement, and loss in a third region is associated with memory trouble.” in short, the terminals are gone, the loss is measurable, and it correlates with the symptoms patients have been reporting for years. https://tech-paper.com/scientists-finally-have-a-biological-explanation-for-why-long-covid-patients-lose-motivation-and-cant-think-clearly-they-scanned-their-brains-and-found-the-dopamine-system-was-physically-damaged/ #neuroscience #neurology #science #LongCOVID #PASC #health

Replies (2)

@datum@zeroes.ca 2026-08-02 18:10

18% of dopamine terminals! 18%! no wonder wordfinding is so markedly worse in some people! I can't get over this magnitude of physical damage. 18%! https://tech-paper.com/scientists-finally-have-a-biological-explanation-for-why-long-covid-patients-lose-motivation-and-cant-think-clearly-they-scanned-their-brains-and-found-the-dopamine-system-was-physically-damaged/

Open ##5074520
@vantiss@social.treehouse.systems 2026-08-03 04:18

@datum@zeroes.ca jsyk, it really looks like tech-paper.com is an AI-slop mill: the articles read like ittheir first article is from May, and there are a lot of themthe quotes in this article all seem lifted from psypostthere is no staff of about page the authors have no bios, don't seek to exist elsewhere online, their bio pics look AI-generated, and the bio pics I looked at have all the "different" authors wearing the same clothing and accessories (the study is real though, so it's probably worth linking to the psypost article instead - who knows what this article may have gotten wrong in the LLM rewrite) edit: I do feel like it's worth noting that the cohort was only n=24 too in the op, but I'm a lot less concerned about that 🩵

Open ##5074524