11/ These stratospheric #aerosols acted as a massive planetary mirror, increasing the Earth's albedo. They scattered incoming shortwave solar radiation back into space while allowing longwave terrestrial heat to escape, causing abrupt cooling. This dimming caused widespread Eurasian crop failures for 18 months, proving that while nature has powerful levers like volcanic forcing, none are positioned to force modern temperatures upward.
The Next Two Weeks Are Critical: Global Race to Stop an Outbreak of The Hantavirus
"There are thousands of viruses that are deadly and knocking at the door of global transmission - causing brief outbreaks in far-flung places - testing and re-testing humans as a potential new host species. This event is a reminder to call our representation and insist that we have competent leadership at organizations like the CDC (80% of top positions are vacant, and our interim head is an economist, not a scientist) and HHS. Good leadership is critical to meet the global challenges of virus and disease control before deadly viruses show up in our communities, our homes.
Absolute Worst-case: “Stuff Of Nightmares” Scenario A friend of mine occasionally likes to say that worry is a misuse of imagination. But sometimes staring into the abyss is just part of human nature so let’s take it there - knowing full well that this is currently an highly unlikely set of scenarios. If this virus mutates during any of the above scenarios to adapt better to human to human sprea
... Show more...
The Next Two Weeks Are Critical: Global Race to Stop an Outbreak of The Hantavirus
"There are thousands of viruses that are deadly and knocking at the door of global transmission - causing brief outbreaks in far-flung places - testing and re-testing humans as a potential new host species. This event is a reminder to call our representation and insist that we have competent leadership at organizations like the CDC (80% of top positions are vacant, and our interim head is an economist, not a scientist) and HHS. Good leadership is critical to meet the global challenges of virus and disease control before deadly viruses show up in our communities, our homes.
Absolute Worst-case: “Stuff Of Nightmares” Scenario A friend of mine occasionally likes to say that worry is a misuse of imagination. But sometimes staring into the abyss is just part of human nature so let’s take it there - knowing full well that this is currently an highly unlikely set of scenarios. If this virus mutates during any of the above scenarios to adapt better to human to human spread or improves it’s transmission capabilities such that it is airborne, then and only then, do we have a COIVD-19-plus scenario on our hands.
In this case I would expect the case fatality rate to drop due to the sheer number of infections, but for there to still be significant loss of life on the order of 2 to10-fold of what occurred at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Air travel lockdowns would be the intelligent choice for global leaders to make, isolating any country where the mutation is found immediately. But that would have also slowed SARS-CoV-2 and it did not occur.
At this point the race for a vaccine and anti-viral drugs would be back on, but I am not sure the United States has the political will or capacity to lead it, over 10,000 STEM PhDs have left the federal government since early 2025 and many have left the country. People who continue to ignore the precautions of scientists in a situation like this would be at very high risk of illness or death. Finally, if like SARS-CoV-2 the human-adapted hantavirus becomes incredibly widespread, local rodent populations may become infected and it will become an endemic virus in their population and an ever-present human threat."
"Calm-mongering interferes with the rational development of a risk management strategy, as the mere mention of plausible downsides becomes subjected to critique. This is no way to manage risk during a crisis. Fear in response to a real threat, as we mentioned before, is a rational survival response. The bigger the risk, the more important it is that it be discussable. Just because something has never happened before, doesn’t mean that it can’t or won’t happen.
The danger of calm-mongering is well known in the context of other kinds of disasters — false reassurances were directly responsible for the deaths of many of the victims of the sinking of the Titanic and the World Trade Center attacks. The failure to properly identify and consider potential downside risks is a hallmark of man-made disasters, from the Columbia and Challenger shuttle disasters to the catastrophic failure of the Castle Bravo H-bomb tests (which devastated entire communities in the Marshall Islands). Assessing and reacting to potentially deadly threats is a survival skill."
"Respiratory protection and the precautionary principle in the current Andes virus outbreak
In the face of continuing uncertainty surrounding a potentially lethal pathogen with documented human-to-human spread, WHO should align its conceptual framing with the precautionary implications of its own operational guidance and explicitly recognise the plausibility of infectious respiratory aerosol inhalation transmission. Failure to do so risks perpetuating avoidable ambiguity at precisely the moment when clarity and precaution are most needed."
"Hantavirus outbreak shows we haven’t learned the lesson of SARS-1 or COVID-19
On May 8th, the World Health Organization (WHO) came out with recommendations for health-care workers dealing with patients with known or suspected Andes Hantavirus. Inexplicably, they are recommending “standard respiratory precautions,” meaning that until the transmission is specified by the WHO as airborne, wearing a medical mask, rather than an N95 or FFP2/3 respirator mask.
For a disease that has up to a 40-50 per cent mortality risk."
Alert Pathogen: Andes hantavirus (ANDV) — the only hantavirus known to be capable of person-to-person transmission. We’ll get into all of it in much greater detail but first, read the following quotes about this strain of the hantavirus from the NEJM study published in 2020 and let that sink in.
“The super-spreading capability of the ANDV Epuyén/18−19 strain shows a facility (R>2) for sustaining continuous chains of transmission if no control measures are enforced”
“On the basis of both the
... Show more...
Andes Hanta Virus Alert: The Global Containment Test That's Faltering. Country by Country Report, Symptoms, Timelines and Much More
Global Exposure Map: Rigorous Quarantine in Australia and France vs. U.S. Fever-Check-Only Self-Monitoring for the Early Seven
Alert Pathogen: Andes hantavirus (ANDV) — the only hantavirus known to be capable of person-to-person transmission. We’ll get into all of it in much greater detail but first, read the following quotes about this strain of the hantavirus from the NEJM study published in 2020 and let that sink in.
“The super-spreading capability of the ANDV Epuyén/18−19 strain shows a facility (R>2) for sustaining continuous chains of transmission if no control measures are enforced”
“On the basis of both the epidemiologic and genomic investigations of person-to-person transmission events, it appears that inhalation of droplets or aerosolized virions may have been the routes of infection.”
This is not a typical hantavirus concern. The outbreak involves Andes virus, a hantavirus strain with documented capacity for person-to-person transmission and, under the wrong conditions, clustered spread that can become much harder to contain if early exposures are missed. Yet much of the public messaging still uses the broad term “hantavirus,” which can unintentionally downplay the risk because most people who search that term will find general explanations saying hantaviruses usually spread from rodents and are not normally contagious between people. That is true for most hantaviruses — but it is not the full story for Andes virus. Whether the vague wording reflects caution, poor communication, or an effort to avoid public alarm, the effect is the same: people may assume this is only a rodent-exposure issue and not understand why exposed passengers, flight contacts, healthcare workers, and household contacts require serious monitoring. Public concern also appears to be fading quickly, as reflected in declining Google Trends interest, which is exactly why clear language matters now. The public does not need panic — but it does need precision. This should be called what it is: an Andes virus outbreak with confirmed international exposure pathways and documented human-to-human transmission potential.
Search behavior itself shows part of the communication failure. Public interest appears to be focused far more on the broad term “hantavirus” than on “Andes virus” or “Andes hantavirus.” That matters because a general search for “hantavirus” often tells people the familiar, mostly true summary: hantaviruses usually come from rodent urine, droppings, or saliva and are generally not contagious between people. But that broad framing can mislead people in this outbreak. The MV Hondius cluster involves Andes virus, the major hantavirus exception with documented person-to-person transmission. If the public keeps hearing only “hantavirus,” many will not understand why passengers are being quarantined, why flights and contacts are being traced, and why countries are treating exposed but apparently healthy people so seriously.
The severity is not theoretical. A French passenger with Andes hantavirus is now critically ill in Paris and has been placed on artificial lung support. A doctor at Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital described ECMO — the machine performing lung function for her — as the “final stage of supportive care.” That does not mean death is certain, and we should not write her off while she is still fighting. But it does show how quickly this disease can move from vague early symptoms to life-threatening respiratory failure. Three people have already died, and WHO has warned countries to prepare for more cases because of the long incubation period and the amount of passenger interaction before the outbreak was detected.
The 2018–2019 Argentina outbreak is the warning map. The NEJM study documented person-to-person Andes virus transmission in Chubut Province, with 34 confirmed infections and superspreading-style transmission chains. In 17 of 33 secondary transmission events, the only recorded contact between the person who transmitted the virus and the person who later became infected occurred on the same day the primary case’s fever began. That is the crucial point: transmission was not limited to late, obviously severe illness. It could occur at the very beginning of recognizable disease, when symptoms may still look mild, nonspecific, or easy to dismiss.
That is why self-reporting and loose home isolation are dangerous weak points. A person facing a 40-plus-day quarantine has every human incentive to explain away a low fever, mild fatigue, stomach upset, headache, cough, or runny nose as travel stress, allergies, anxiety, a cold, or food poisoning. Some may delay checking their temperature. Some may avoid reporting symptoms until they feel much worse. Some may isolate informally at home without telling public health officials, believing they are doing the responsible thing while still exposing household members. And some may have only mild symptoms and recover — but the unanswered question is how many people they exposed on day one or day two of illness.
That does not mean every exposed passenger is infected. It means the containment strategy must assume that some infected people may look well, feel only slightly ill, or underreport symptoms. For a high-fatality Andes virus outbreak, that is enough to justify a stricter standard: supervised daily monitoring, serial testing where available, no commercial travel, strict separation from household and community contacts, and airborne-level precautions in enclosed transport, healthcare, quarantine, and home-care settings. Anything less depends too heavily on perfect honesty, perfect symptom recognition, and perfect timing — three things outbreaks rarely give us.
Current Global Case Count: As of May 13, 2026, a total of 11 cases have been reported worldwide, all linked to the MV Hondius outbreak. This includes 9 laboratory-confirmed infections with the Andes virus strain and 2 probable/suspected cases. Three people have died (case-fatality ratio of approximately 27% among reported cases, consistent with the 38% CFR observed in prior Andes virus clusters).
The latest addition is the provisional positive case identified via admission PCR among the 14 Spanish passengers quarantined at Gómez Ulla Central Defense Hospital in Madrid. This brings the practical working total to 11 confirmed or probable cases, with testing of repatriated groups and early disembarkers still ongoing in multiple countries. No secondary community transmissions have been confirmed outside the original ship-linked network.
All the evidence points to hantavirus being transmitted through the air as well.
However, the WHO continues to claim otherwise, even going so far as to say, “This is not SARS-CoV-2.” This statement is quite ironic given that the WHO posted a dangerous tweet in March 2020 stating that COVID-19 was not airborne, despite all the evidence demonstrating that it was. This irresponsible statement cost lives. And now they are doing exactly the same thing.
The WHO are NOT recommending to isolate cruise ship passengers (even high-risk contacts) UNLESS they develop symptoms.
The WHO is only recommending:
SYMPTOMATIC cases: isolation
ASYMPTOMATIC cases: monitoring
The International Hantavirus Society issued an important statement on May 7 that calls this entire strategy into question.
They clarify that “the precise timing of infectiousness remains incompletely defined”.
Infected people MAY be infectious before clear symptoms develop.
“The precise timing of infectiousness remains incompletely defined. While symptomatic patients are likely to represent the highest-risk group, available outbreak reconstructions do not support overly categorical statements that transmission can occur only after clear symptom onset. Transmission potenti
... Show more...
A compilation of the WHO’s negligence regarding hantavirus
The WHO are NOT recommending to isolate cruise ship passengers (even high-risk contacts) UNLESS they develop symptoms.
The WHO is only recommending:
SYMPTOMATIC cases: isolation
ASYMPTOMATIC cases: monitoring
The International Hantavirus Society issued an important statement on May 7 that calls this entire strategy into question.
They clarify that “the precise timing of infectiousness remains incompletely defined”.
Infected people MAY be infectious before clear symptoms develop.
“The precise timing of infectiousness remains incompletely defined. While symptomatic patients are likely to represent the highest-risk group, available outbreak reconstructions do not support overly categorical statements that transmission can occur only after clear symptom onset. Transmission potential during prodromal, early symptomatic or minimally symptomatic phases, should be considered when designing contact tracing, testing and quarantine strategies.”
Thankfully some countries (like the UK & Spain) have confirmed that they are sensibly ignoring the WHO guidance and adopting a more cautious approach, asking ALL passengers departing the ship to self-isolate or quarantine for up to 6 weeks.
The US have also confirmed that the 17 Americans currently on the ship will be evacuated to a specialist quarantine facility in Nebraska upon repatriation to the US. (Duration of quarantine is not yet confirmed).
MODES OF TRANSMISSION Maria Van Kerkhove was clear that the Andes Virus is known to transmit from human-to-human. She then went on to emphasise that transmission occurs “mainly among close contacts, either providing clinical care or people who’ve had close physical contact”.
This is not supported by the evidence.
In 2018, there was a major Andes Virus outbreak in Argentina which led to 34 cases & 11 deaths.
The outbreak had an R0 of 2.1 before strict quarantine measures were enforced.
Importantly, detailed investigations into this Andes Virus outbreak in Argentina in 2018 clearly revealed that multiple transmissions had taken place WITHOUT CLOSE CONTACT.
The 2018 Andes Virus ‘Superspreader’ study also states that:
“On the basis of both the epidemiologic and genomic investigations of person-to-person transmission events, it appears that inhalation of droplets or aerosolised virions may have been the routes of infection.”
It’s also worth noting that the UK classify the Andes Virus (hantavirus) as an AIRBORNE High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID).
Please note the key word there: AIRBORNE.
However, despite all this readily available evidence that Andes Virus may well be airborne, María Van Kerkhove was on a calm-mongering mission.
Again & again, she confidently reassured listeners that the virus only spreads via “close intimate contact”.
“This is not SARS-CoV-2”
This feels suspiciously similar to March 2020 when, despite a lack of evidence, the WHO confidently stated that:
“COVID is NOT airborne”
The consequences of this flawed statement resulted in countless preventable deaths as countries failed to prioritise airborne mitigations.
Interestingly, the ‘Superspreader’ study was mentioned during the WHO press conference.
They emphasised its similarities to the HV Hondius outbreak but reassured that, since the 2018 outbreak only led to 34 cases, they “don’t anticipate a large epidemic” from this outbreak.
However, the WHO neglected to mention that in 2018, Argentinian health authorities enforced quarantine measures for ALL high-risk contacts for at least 40 days, even if they had NO symptoms.
A total of 142 people were quarantined to prevent the spread.
Hantavirus: What We Know The following blog contains information that we will be updating; the last update was on May 8th: healthselfdefense.substack.com…
1. What is a hantavirus?
It is a family of viruses. They are found in animal hosts, often rodents (rats, voles, field mice, etc.), and sometimes in other animals (bats, fish, moles, etc.). There are many different types. These viruses are present all over the world. In humans, they can cause problems in the lungs, heart, kidneys, etc. The disease is quite rare in France (around one hundred people are hospitalized each year). There is no specific treatment for these viruses; the symptoms are treated while the body recovers.
2. Why are we talking about this now?
Because three deaths were reported among the passengers and crew of the MV Hondius, which departed from Ushuaia, Argentina, on April 1 bound for Cape Verde (West Africa). Doctors performed tests and detected hantaviru
... Show more...
Hantavirus: What We Know The following blog contains information that we will be updating; the last update was on May 8th: healthselfdefense.substack.com…
1. What is a hantavirus?
It is a family of viruses. They are found in animal hosts, often rodents (rats, voles, field mice, etc.), and sometimes in other animals (bats, fish, moles, etc.). There are many different types. These viruses are present all over the world. In humans, they can cause problems in the lungs, heart, kidneys, etc. The disease is quite rare in France (around one hundred people are hospitalized each year). There is no specific treatment for these viruses; the symptoms are treated while the body recovers.
2. Why are we talking about this now?
Because three deaths were reported among the passengers and crew of the MV Hondius, which departed from Ushuaia, Argentina, on April 1 bound for Cape Verde (West Africa). Doctors performed tests and detected hantavirus.
3. What are the symptoms?
Fever, sometimes high, muscle aches, extreme fatigue (similar to the flu), sometimes shortness of breath, diarrhea, hemorrhages (abnormal bleeding), etc.
4. How is it transmitted?
Most hantaviruses are transmitted from animals to humans (this is called zoonosis), but very few are transmitted between humans. Unfortunately, the strain detected on the cruise ship is the Andean type, known to be more easily transmitted between humans than other strains.
There is a relatively long incubation period (that is, the time between infection and the onset of symptoms), averaging 2 weeks (ranging from 1 to 8 weeks). This is bad news; it means that many people will become infected without even realizing it, and that it may take up to 2 months for them to show symptoms.
Currently, the evidence indicates that it is transmitted via aerosols and droplets. Unfortunately, as at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments are spreading misinformation by focusing solely on droplets. This decision to only discuss one transmission route and not the other is not based on science, but rather on prioritizing the capitalist economy.
We are seeing the same patterns of downplaying the hantavirus as with COVID. This downplaying is not based on facts, but on the greed of capitalism. The capitalist system depends on constant growth: production, consumption, and the constant expansion of profits. Even brief pauses have disastrous effects on capital. We are repeatedly told “not to panic” while failing to provide accurate information about the virus. When a pandemic threat looms, those most afraid are the capitalists, because their economy cannot withstand even a small pause.
Implementing the necessary mass prevention strategies to curb transmission (daily rapid testing, contact tracing, guaranteed paid leave for exposed workers, high-quality masks for the population, etc.) is costly and reduces profits.
For capitalism to function, two things are required: a constant supply of workers who produce value and an endless flow of consumption to materialize that value as profit for the capitalist. When we face the prospect of death and pandemics, the contradictions become starkly apparent. We realize that governments in capitalist systems don’t prioritize our lives, but rather the pursuit of profit.
Media attention focuses on reproducing the official rhetoric through opinion pieces and interviews. Scientists don’t all think alike; there are conservatives and progressives, scientists who prioritize care and those who will say anything to defend the stability of capitalism. The experts promoted by the government and most media outlets are selected based on their proximity to power, both in terms of their official appointment and their rhetorical stance.
5. Are there risks?
When you contract hantavirus, there is a risk of death. The risk varies depending on the type of hantavirus. The Andean type detected on Mount Hondius causes the death of between 3 and 6 out of every 10 infected people.
In general, it is currently very difficult to determine whether there is a real risk or not. Outbreaks caused by this virus have already occurred, and they were controlled quite quickly.
What we can say for sure is that the necessary measures were not taken (properly isolating the sick and those who were in contact with them, requiring the use of FFP2 masks, etc.) or were not taken correctly.
6. How can I protect myself?
In general, against hantaviruses, it is recommended to wear an FFP2 mask when working in places where there may be rodents, especially if dust is generated (when cleaning a room, transporting wood or soil, etc.), wear gloves, and wash your hands afterward. We recommend the widespread use of FFP2 masks.
Currently, there is no effective vaccine against hantavirus.
Press review and scientific articles for further reading:
- A glossary with definitions of terms used on the subject such as case fatality rate, zoonosis, reservoir species, etc.
Paul Beckwith, a climate science educator, goes through James Hansen's recent warnings about a coming "Super El Niño".
This video (24:48) assumes a small amount of background in math and science, enough to read time/temperature graphs, but is generally quite accessible in its explanations. He walks through a lot of good stuff like how the El Niño / La Niña cycle works, what some of the "forcings" are that are driving some of these things, why things like aerosols matter, what different models show, what the consensus predictions have been and why Hansen's predicting something substantively stronger.
It's a pretty worrisome set of things, but Hansen has been an important voice in the climate conversation, and I think Beckwith's presentation is pretty level—trying to just walk through the information dispassionately in a way that can help you understand the science part.
Paul Beckwith, a climate science educator, goes through James Hansen's recent warnings about a coming "Super El Niño".
This video (24:48) assumes a small amount of background in math and science, enough to read time/temperature graphs, but is generally quite accessible in its explanations. He walks through a lot of good stuff like how the El Niño / La Niña cycle works, what some of the "forcings" are that are driving some of these things, why things like aerosols matter, what different models show, what the consensus predictions have been and why Hansen's predicting something substantively stronger.
It's a pretty worrisome set of things, but Hansen has been an important voice in the climate conversation, and I think Beckwith's presentation is pretty level—trying to just walk through the information dispassionately in a way that can help you understand the science part.
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
#Amazon rainforest fires produce secondary ultrafine particles that may affect weather and climate
#Aerosols can also influence #weather and #climate by modifying #cloud formation and changing how much of the #sun's energy is reflected or absorbed by the #atmosphere. Compared to larger particles directly emitted from fires, the formation and presence of ultrafine particles (UFPs) have previously been overlooked.
Summer warming in Europe underestimated by global and regional climate simulations.
In much of western-central Europe, summer temperatures have surged three times faster than the global mean warming since 1980, yet this is not captured by most #climate #model simulations.
The key is #aerosols, whose inclusion in the modelling account for the discrepancies.
Aerosol misrepresentations in many regional climate models largely explain why their simulations underestimate the summer warming in Western Europe in the past 40 years, according to a multi-model analysis.
