this post was submitted on 11 May 2026

105 points (90.7% liked)

Videos

18288 readers

626 users here now

For sharing interesting videos from around the Web!

Rules

Videos only (aside from meta posts flagged with [META])
Follow the global Mastodon.World rules and the Lemmy.World TOS while posting and commenting.
Don't be a jerk
No advertising
No political videos, post those to !politicalvideos@lemmy.world instead.
Avoid clickbait titles. (Tip: Use dearrow)
Link directly to the video source and not for example an embedded video in an article or tracked sharing link.
Duplicate posts may be removed
AI generated content must be tagged with "[AI] …" ^Discussion^

Note: bans may apply to both !videos@lemmy.world and !politicalvideos@lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Flutter@lemmy.world

Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world

can@sh.itjust.works

qaz@lemmy.world

qaz@lemmy.blahaj.zone

qaz@sh.itjust.works

105

"Public deserves to know”: Harvard Professor says official messaging contradicts hantavirus science (www.youtube.com)

submitted 1 week ago by givesomefucks@lemmy.world to c/videos@lemmy.world

72 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 67 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

This is the most public I've seen someone who actually understands this is "Andes variant"...

Not just America, but lots of countries are pretending that this is regular Hanta and not the Andes variant.

Officials keep saying it's not respiratory, it's not human to human, and it's no big deal...

None of that is true for Andes, and because of that we started studying this variant years ago, because we have no way to fight it, and it could cause a devastating pandemic...

https://news.utexas.edu/2026/03/11/scientists-map-deadly-hantavirus-bringing-treatments-one-step-closer/

In 2024, the NIH identified several families of viruses — including hantaviruses — that were extremely dangerous and had no effective vaccines or treatments, making them of special concern for their potential to cause a pandemic. To better prepare for future pandemics, the NIH awarded a series of grants through the ReVAMPP program to study these viruses and develop new tools to combat them, including the grant that established the Provident consortium and enabled this latest study. McLellan and other Provident researchers have simultaneously been working to find ways to address other viruses that health officials have identified as especially dangerous in an outbreak, such as measles and Nipah virus.

Like, multiple people are starting to show symptoms on evac flights, they 100% infected everyone on their plane. But we're only doing two week quarantines after the flight, and it can take 6 weeks for symptoms and transmission

We're fucking it all up again and no one cares, maybe we'll get lucky, but I don't think so.

Edit:

One Italian started displaying symptoms on the evac flight...

One Spanish passenger showed symptoms of the flight (but at least used containment pods)...

One French passenger...

Two US passengers...

But we're all still just doing two week quarantine, this is 100% getting out into the general public.

I fucking hate being Cassandra

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

We use WHO guidelines here, putting the passengers who were brought home in at least 42 days of quarantine. The US, though, now that is a different thing. Maybe they'll try injecting bleach, like "the greatest mind ever" suggested...

By the way, our media definitely do inform people that this is a human-to-human transferable virus. Although this was already clear when they mentioned the Andes strain a few days ago.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

The NEJM article says a possible 8 weeks transmissibility (in some cases).
So even 42 days isn't enough.
And many people couldn't even follow their short Covid quarantine at home.
I don't believe they can all handle 6 weeks, and certainly not in a safe way if they are made to believe it's not easily transmitted.
Their relatives will get it.
Totally inadequate measures and wildly irresponsible for a virus with a 2.19R factor and 35-50% mortality.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Officials keep saying it's not respiratory, it's not human to human, and it's no big deal...

From what I've read, the human to human transmission requires very close contact. I've even heard it's described as "intimate" contact. That seems to me to imply that it doesn't transmit from human to human very easily.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 5 points 6 days ago

It is respiratory if it's the Andes Hantavirus, and it is.
These tourists literally went to the Andes.
While the first one has an R of 0,8 Andes has an R factor of 2.19 (see article below)
Anything R>2 has a high risk of large-scale epidemics.
Even for Covid is was difficult to determine the R-factor but 3.28 to 4.22 is significantly higher than initial WHO estimates of 1.4–2.5.
And this disease has not been thoroughly studied.
Another isue I found from this article says it can be transmitted to up to 8 weeks (even if exceptional).
I only know from NL and Be where the passengers have to quarantine for only 6 weeks.
And this in their homes.
This sounds verry risky and irresponsible.
Except for the passengers that left in St Helens and possible crew members 'escaping' the source (ship) was a good opportunity to end this quickly.
I feel like they're taking big risks.
Especially if those quarantined believe the low risk transmissibility narrative.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

What?

What are you reading?

As the video talks about, just walking within four feet of an infected person is enough for transmission...

No coughing, no sneezing, not even talking required.

A dude four feet away is breathing normally and may feel like their allergies are acting up, and that's enough for you to catch something with a 40% mortality rate ..

I’ve even heard it’s described as “intimate” contact. That seems to me to imply that it doesn’t transmit from human to human very easily.

All of that is about Hanta in general and true for 99.99% variants...

But not the Andes variant that everyone is talking about

Jesus fucking Christ dude, you're literally doing what the video is saying is the problem...

Even if you didn't watch the video, presumably you read the comment you replied to

I need to understand why you don't get this so I can help you and others understand it, and obviously my last comment didn't work.

[–] Bloomcole@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

R factor of 2.19!
And mortality of 35% to 50%!
Glad you made the distinction between Andes and 'normal' Hanta which they (mis)use to say it's not so alarming.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2009040

I am certainly a bit concerned, especially how nonchalant they handle it, trusting on self-quarantine and this for 2 weeks less than is required for Andes virus.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 week ago

As the video talks about, just walking within four feet of an infected person is enough for transmission…

No coughing, no sneezing, not even talking required.

That's wrong.

This spread is usually limited to people who have close contact with a sick person. This includes direct physical contact, prolonged time spent in close or enclosed spaces, and exposure to the sick person's body fluids.

Instead of being alarmist, spend some more time reading.

https://www.cdc.gov/hantavirus/about/andesvirus.html

It's not accepted that Andes can transmit person-person. There are some papers that claim this, poorly done.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34515290/

Cruise industry is trying to distract from a chronic problem they have with fecal-oral viral transmission and food infected with rodent feces and urine.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Ok, calm down. Chill, relax, take a breath.

First, none of this:

As the video talks about, just walking within four feet of an infected person is enough for transmission...

No coughing, no sneezing, not even talking required.

A dude four feet away is breathing normally and may feel like their allergies are acting up, and that's enough for you to catch something with a 40% mortality rate ..

Was in the comment I replied to.

Apparently it was in the video, but I am not able to watch the video right now. But even if these claims are in the video, that doesn't necessarily make them true or accurate. And frankly, it would be nice if you offered some kind of substantiation for these incredible claims beyond "watch this YouTube video." Any kind of credible source.

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 21 points 1 week ago

The video is Joseph Allen, Professor of Exposure Assessment Science at Harvard University, directly explaining his research and communications directly with the doctor on the cruise ship. I'm not sure you can find a more credible source. It's not edited clips or anything. A news program invited him on, handed him a mic, and then just let him talk. No leading questions or anything even.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

First, none of this:

As the video talks about, just walking within four feet of an infected person is enough for transmission…

No coughing, no sneezing, not even talking required.

A dude four feet away is breathing normally and may feel like their allergies are acting up, and that’s enough for you to catch something with a 40% mortality rate …

Was in the comment I replied to.

It literally was...

Officials keep saying it’s not respiratory, it’s not human to human, and it’s no big deal…

None of that is true for Andes,

I'm genuinely asking because everyone deserves to hear this in a way they understand...

Is the way I wrote that Andes is respiratory, it's transmissionable to humans, and a big deal just not comprehendable?

Because I'm already dialing it down a lot, and the issue is if I dial it down too much, there's no more "why" for why we should be concerned.

If you so finally understand this, can you phrase it in a way that you would have understood immediately?

Edit:

It's "respiratory" right?

That means "what we use to breathe" if that is infected, then it can be spread through your mouth holes...

And not require physical contact.

Why is this so difficult?

I only took you off my blocklist because everyone deserves to hear about this, but I'm already starting to figure out why I had to do that now.

And frankly, it would be nice if you offered some kind of substantiation for these incredible claims beyond “watch this YouTube video.” Any kind of credible source.

I fucking did....

https://news.utexas.edu/2026/03/11/scientists-map-deadly-hantavirus-bringing-treatments-one-step-closer/

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

I fucking did…

But you did not. Obviously.

[–] brennesel@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I watched the whole video and several times Allen says "... the overall threat to the general public is low". He also says "we know very little about the transmission" and "this is not going to be a Covid blow up".

Yes, we should take this seriously. But please don’t be overly dramatic when there simply aren’t enough details available yet.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Dude...you're not supposed to watch the videos or read the links. New to Lemmy?

[–] brennesel@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 6 days ago

On the contrary. I’ve been here for several years and still have to get used to the fact that it’s becoming more and more like Reddit.

[+] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If one guy on the Titanic said "maybe we shouldn't hit the iceberg headon"

That doesn't mean we're being careful.

We're still headed straight at the iceberg, one guy saying maybe not to didn't change anything.

He thinks that people will understand the difference and start treating this like the Andes variant, and that will happen when it's still just isolated cases and we'll be able to handle it...

I don't trust America's government agencies run by people like RFK Jr to make the right calls.

I think the gov will fuck it up, and that makes this go beyond the few isolated cases he's hoping it stops at

How much faith do you have in RFK jr to handle this probably? How long do you think before he puts the raccoon penis down and gets directly involved in this?

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You need to chill, the R or number of people who will be infected by someone with the Andes variant of Hantavirus is extremely low. Too low to result in a pandemic.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

It's 2.1....

Epidemiological analysis estimated an initial median reproductive number of approximately 2.1 before control measures were implemented, decreasing after isolation, quarantine and active contact tracing.

https://zenodo.org/records/20112944

2-3x COVID in the UK

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-52473523

Are you saying COVID wasn't a pandemic?

Logically you are if you're saying R value determines that and 2.1 means it can't be a pandemic when COVID was 0.7-0.9...

But I don't think there's a lot of logic at play here

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Initial estimates of the basic reproduction number (R0) for COVID-19 in January 2020 were between 1.4 and 2.5,[60] but a subsequent analysis claimed that it may be about 5.7 (with a 95 per cent confidence interval of 3.8 to 8.9).[61]

The link to the actual study

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7323562/

Let me know if you find a problem with their methodology.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

The abstract, in full:

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is the causative agent of the ongoing coronavirus disease pandemic. Initial estimates of the early dynamics of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, suggested a doubling time of the number of infected persons of 6–7 days and a basic reproductive number (R0) of 2.2–2.7. We collected extensive individual case reports across China and estimated key epidemiologic parameters, including the incubation period (4.2 days). We then designed 2 mathematical modeling approaches to infer the outbreak dynamics in Wuhan by using high-resolution domestic travel and infection data. Results show that the doubling time early in the epidemic in Wuhan was 2.3–3.3 days. Assuming a serial interval of 6–9 days, we calculated a median R0 value of 5.7 (95% CI 3.8–8.9). We further show that active surveillance, contact tracing, quarantine, and early strong social distancing efforts are needed to stop transmission of the virus.

So...

That's saying the initial R value was 2.2-2.7...

And in the last studied out real of Andes, they said it was 2.1...

Since you're offering to answer questions:

Why shouldn't we compare the initial R values since we know both?

If we have a median R value of something with a best case 40% mortality...

By that point we're already fucked.

Like, I'm starting to doubt facts and/or logic are gonna help you here buddy.

But that was a nice source you didn't understand, so thanks for linking that.

Edit:

Like, it almost feels like you think "r value" is a set number and not a descriptor of how it's actually spreading...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_reproduction_number

You just don't understand what the words and phrases you keep using mean...

Like, if contact is minimized, it will be lower...

If someone goes the World Cup, it makes the number skyrocket, despite the virus not mutating...

You just fundamentally don't understand any of this buddy, and instead of asking questions to learn, you want a slap fight.

I'm probably going to give up on helping you soon

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You want to compare apples to apples now after claiming

when COVID was 0.7-0.9

Is that right?

In the video you linked the expert said this wasn’t a covid situation. You need to calm down.

You know what, instead of pointlessly having an internet argument now how about we both set a reminder for 1 year from now.

Let’s revisit this and examine who was right. Should be fun.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

instead of pointlessly having an internet argument now how about we both set a reminder for 1 year from now.

Welp, that's pretty much the proof that neither facts nor logic will work...

It's like if I said "if we don't hit the breaks the bus is driving off the cliff"

And you said that's only true if the bus goes off the cliff, even if we hit the breaks

You think that if there isn't a global pandemic, it means one couldn't have happened.

I'm sorry buddy, I honestly gave you a lot of chances, but you don't want facts and logic to try and figure out reality, you have a belief of what will happen, and will say anything that defends that belief.

Literally no one will ever be able to change your opinion about any thing.

And the fucked up thing is you're likely proud of that

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 1 points 6 days ago

I really like how you misrepresented stats, created strawman arguments and just invented stuff that was never said and claim you’re the only one with facts.

The actual experts are saying this won’t be a pandemic.

Enjoy having whatever meltdown you’re experiencing. The rest of us will be chilling out in reality.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

None of your claims about transmissibility are in the article you linked to. That article is all about protein complex imaging.

The source for the claims seems to be the video. Fine. I understand the person in the video is highly accredited. I will watch it when I am able.

Block me, I don't give a shit.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The problem is, you're repeating dangerous scientific misinformation...

That could very likely result in actual deaths if anyone is naive enough to listen to you.

If you can't understand this, can you at least stop making confident sounding comments that contain dangerous scientific misinformation?

I don't know why I blocked you before, but this time you're causing actual human suffering and death, it's not just you or if anyone can help you understand.

It's now about making sure you stop spreading misinformation that will lead to death and suffering

[–] Slayer@infosec.pub 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have him tagged as “idiot” and looking at his comments here, I'm once again 100% certain that he is one.

[–] TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I never used tags before. I got you tagged now too!