croissant"SARS is not airborne." — Bonnie Henry, 2003
"Unlike SARS, COVID-19 is not airborne." — Bonnie Henry, 2020
"Unlike COVID-19, Hantavirus is not airborne." — Bonnie Henry, 2026
smitten@croissant It is impossible for dangerous things to be in the air because air is invisible.
keithzg@smitten_ @croissant What people don't understand about public health policy is, the most important thing is you have to believe really hard that no drastic interventions or systemic changes are necessary, this is priority and step number 1
Jordan Biserkov@keithzg @smitten_ @croissant
Sir Richard Wharton: Standard Foreign Office response in a time of crisis. In stage one we say nothing is going to happen.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Stage two, we say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.
Sir Richard Wharton: In stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it, but there’s nothing we *can* do.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done, but it’s too late now.
Klingon Sponge@jbiserkov @keithzg @smitten_ @croissant
I remember that show from when I was a kid, and I really should re-visit it as a cynical adult.
I remember that show from when I was a kid, and I really should re-visit it as a cynical adult.
Les Lore@croissant Wash your hands and buy Fleuvog shoes - pretty much all one can expect at this point.
Gabriel Pettier@croissant the stakes, not the odds, right?
@tshirtman That is exactly why the precautionary principle is so important. Unfortunately, some incorrigibly believe that caution means "Let's be cautious about acting and wait for all the facts or for this to just blow over."
John"I've always interpreted the idea that we should take 'precautions' as being cautious about doing literally anything to prevent disease until it's already killed tens of thousands of people." - most public health people in 2026
@johnzajac @croissant i also really fear the wrong lessons were taken out of covid, public policy has been seen as a catastrophic failure, both enormously costly on the economy (we still pay the price to this day), ineffective at solving it (i still think lockdowns saved a lot of people, buying precious time and allowing the system to handle the load better, but in the end the resolution was "giving up"), and also it was so costly politically, that they don't want to go through that again.
Lockdowns didn't exist in the United States; most States had 2-4 weeks of precautions, followed by...literally nothing but death and disease. A few States (with big cities and blue govts) kept precautions for ~6 months, but they were never compulsory and people literally stopped caring about them by midsummer.
It's why our death toll and LC burden per capita is literally multiples larger than any other modern nation.
As with all half-measures poorly implemented with one foot out the door, these didn't work, and that lack of efficacy due to half-assery was attributed to *the technique* not the *amount of effort and fidelity put into implementing it*, because we live in a clownshoe full of toe fungus
Add to that the necessity for neofascists to shut down COVID social programs ASAP and we get the Long Con of "vax and relax" coupled with "but the death toll is low!" and "it's just a cold"
@johnzajac @croissant a lot of countries indeed did it more seriously (being in the netherlands, we had months of very strict, and more than a year of very encouraged remote work, australia probably did it the most, but at a very high social price), but ultimately they gave up, and we'll never convince the covid. skeptics that it was worth it (the avoided deaths being invisible). So i'm convinced the next health crisis will be handled with less precautions, not more.
"COVID skeptics" in the initial phases of the pandemic were 1) well funded and 2) tasked with creating the conditions necessary to get people back to work.
The ruling class has known since April/May 2020 that vaccines wouldn't work well bc coronaviruses evolve too quickly, but infra/healthcare was against their ideology so 🤷♂️
It's why govt/rich people have advanced air-cleaning systems and UV222 installed, but schools/public hospitals do not.
If you ever want nightmare fuel, read the op-eds by Great Barrington ghouls and their affiliated centrist boosters about how we should "infect all kids" to "create herd immunity" (we knew wasn't possible, btw) and "sacrifice the weak" to "get the economy back on track".
Truly reads like a manifesto of some psycho killer in a bleak dystopian crime thriller.
(those are not quotes from the pieces; they were far more circumspect and polite than to say that stuff *out loud*)
Gin Kangaroo@johnzajac @tshirtman @croissant Exactly. One only has to look at the infrastructure installed in e.g. WHO headquarters or virus security around meetings like DAVOS to know that the lies are only being fed to those who need to keep the capitalist machinery turning.
Saskboy K.@johnzajac @tshirtman @croissant I call them the #ReOpeners because they said they just wanted to "reopen the economy".
Keith@croissant Honestly, this not a hill they should die on. Literally.
@invadersil They won't be the ones dying on said hill.
@croissant Honestly, I hope hanta takes them out because they were over confident.
Kate Nyhan@croissant Just TBC, did she really say that? Or is it a joke?
@nyhan Quoth Bonnie Henry just yesterday:
However, it is important to be clear that hantavirus is very different from respiratory viruses, such as COVID-19. It does not spread in the same way and is not considered a disease with pandemic potential.
@croissant I shouldn't have doubted 🤣
AI6YR Ben@croissant Seriously?!
Debbie@croissant It most certanily is airborne. Did she actually say this? 🙄
Ursidinoj/The Bjornsdottirs@croissant She is nothing if not consistent. #lang_en
Jean-François Mezei@croissant Sars-1 had the virus become inert as soon as the droplet in which it was exhaled evaporated. Therefore very short lifetime after being exhaled and while still suspended in air. Hence the 2m distancing rule which worked for Sars-1.
When Sars-CoV2 was typedf in January 2020, it was ASSUMED to behave as SARS1 and hence the same distancing rules recommended.
In April, Trump killed a massively imporatnt story by suggesting people inject bleach or shine bright light up their ass.
(cont
@croissant (SARS cont)
The April press conference started with the first evidence or virus survivability which was revealed by NIH/CDC during start of press conference: The Sars-CoV2 virus remained active FAR longer in the air and on surfaces than SARS-1. This, after the droplet had evaporated in air, the virus remained contagious and hence the 2m rule no longer sufficient, and masks suggested and isolation ect.
Trump COVFEFEd this with his bleach antics, no US media spoke of new data.
@croissant hanta/Andes has existed for quite some time, and there is no indication this is a new virus, so assumptions on propagation remain valid unless proven otherwise.
PCR tests already exist, so easier to tell when someone is infected.
(cont)
@croissant As an example of how media often misrepresent science:
In early January 2020, WHO stated that as a corona virus, it was very likely human to human transmissible, but there was no evidence of this yet.
On January 14, China stated there was no evidence yet. Evidence surfaced a few days later. The why matters:
(cont)
@croissant (cont)
Until PCR tests available, you couldn't check who was infected.
PCR tests took a few days for results, and would only be posistive a few days after someone was infected.
By Jan 14, China had not yet had the time for:
-PCR tests becoming available.
-Person 1 gets infected, tests positive on PCR
(few days elapse)
-Person 2 has symptoms, didnt go to Wuhan market, gets positive PCR, and has had contacts with person 1.
WHO's statement were scientifically correct at time made.
Your homework is to look up the "precautionary principle" and report back to the class
sleepy62🍁🛠️ 🖥️ 🔬 🌞That was actually the consensus at the time. Can't blame this one individual. Science evolves.
🧐 🤷♂️
Worries over airborne spread "tempest in a teapot", according to Bonnie Henry
Controversy over airborne transmission of COVID-19 'a tempest in a teapot,' Dr. Bonnie Henry says | CBC News
Dr. Bonnie Henry says the controversy over airborne transmission of COVID-19 has been overblown, after hundreds of scientists signed a letter calling for the World Health Organization to revise its recommendations.
Kim Crawley 😷 (she/her)How's that boot taste?
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@sleepy62/116559842751936905
How's that boot taste?
DavidM_yegvery consistent, your Bonnie Henry is
Incident Creator ❎@croissant
Anything can become airbourne given enough common household chemicals mixed in the proper proportions.
Anything can become airbourne given enough common household chemicals mixed in the proper proportions.
Willow (she/her)@croissant I am so angry that she almost single handedly turned me into one of those people who doesn't trust the health recommendations from the government.
I hate that her (paraphrasing a quote) primary lesson learned from covid was that people don't like restrictions so it's better to just let viruses spread in case people get big mad.