19% Of Men Had Erectile Dysfunction After COVID-19, Over 9% At 2 Years

Forbes - Mar 17th, 2025

A recent study published in Scientific Reports reveals that 19% of 609 men who were hospitalized with COVID-19 in Japan experienced erectile dysfunction (ED) for up to two years post-infection. The COVID-19 Recovery Study II surveyed men aged 20 and older, primarily during the alpha and delta variant phases in 2021. The study found no correlation between the severity of COVID-19, reinfection, vaccination, or antiviral treatment and the likelihood of developing ED. However, it highlighted that symptoms like fatigue, shortness of breath, anxiety, and sleep disturbances were more prevalent among those with ED.

The findings underscore the need for healthcare providers to consider ED as a potential long-term complication of COVID-19, especially since social stigma may prevent men from discussing this issue. The study suggests that post-acute COVID-19 care should address ED proactively, as it can significantly impact the quality of life. Treatments are available, ranging from counseling and lifestyle changes to medication and surgery, offering hope for recovery. This research adds to the growing body of evidence on the diverse and prolonged effects of COVID-19, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive long-term care strategies.

Covid 19 Japan Scientific Reports Erectile Dysfunction Long Covid Symptoms Men's Health Covid 19 Recovery Study Ii

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a comprehensive overview of a study linking erectile dysfunction to long COVID, offering valuable insights into a less-discussed aspect of the virus's long-term impact. It excels in clarity and timeliness, presenting the information in an accessible and engaging manner. However, the article could improve in areas such as source quality and transparency by providing direct citations and more detailed explanations of the study's methodology. While it raises awareness about an important public health issue, the article could enhance its impact by including expert opinions and exploring alternative perspectives. Overall, it is a well-written piece that contributes meaningfully to ongoing discussions about COVID-19's long-term effects, though it could benefit from greater depth and diversity in sourcing and perspective.

Accuracy

The article provides a generally accurate depiction of the study's findings about erectile dysfunction (ED) as a potential long-term effect of COVID-19. It correctly reports that 19% of the 609 men surveyed experienced ED post-hospitalization, with some cases persisting for up to two years. The study's details, such as the time frame (March to September 2021) and location (20 hospitals in Japan), are consistent with the reported data. However, the article could improve accuracy by providing more details on the study's methodology and how ED was assessed. Additionally, while the article mentions the lack of association between ED and COVID-19 severity or treatment, it would benefit from citing specific statistical data to support these claims.

Balance

The article predominantly focuses on the negative impacts of COVID-19 related to erectile dysfunction, providing a comprehensive view of how the condition can manifest and persist post-infection. However, it does not extensively explore alternative perspectives or studies that might contradict or offer additional context to these findings. The article briefly mentions potential treatments for ED, which helps balance the narrative by offering solutions. Still, it could improve by including perspectives from medical professionals or alternative studies that might offer different insights into the relationship between COVID-19 and ED.

Clarity

The article is written in a clear and accessible manner, with a logical flow that guides the reader through the study's findings and implications. It uses straightforward language and avoids excessive jargon, making it easy for a general audience to understand. The use of analogies, such as comparing erections to Netflix shows, adds a touch of humor and relatability to the topic. However, the article could improve clarity by providing more detailed explanations of the medical terms and processes involved in the study.

Source quality

The article references a study published in 'Scientific Reports,' which is a reputable source. However, it lacks direct citations or links to the study, which would enhance the credibility and allow readers to verify the claims independently. The article also does not mention any experts or additional sources that could provide further authority to the claims made. Including interviews with researchers involved in the study or independent experts in the field of COVID-19 and erectile dysfunction would improve the source quality significantly.

Transparency

The article provides some context about the study, such as the sample size and demographic details. However, it lacks transparency in explaining the study's methodology, such as how ED was diagnosed or measured. Additionally, the article does not disclose any potential conflicts of interest or funding sources for the study, which are important for assessing the impartiality of the findings. Greater transparency about these aspects would help readers better understand the basis of the claims and any factors that might influence the study's outcomes.