WHO is arrogant and blinking as ever in #CovidIsAirborne, tweets by PR director Gabby Stern Shaw

Lambert Stretter of Corrente.

Gabriella “Gabby” Stern Since 2019, he has been the Communications Director of the World Health Organization (WHO). She is the representative of the Director-General of WHO. Prior to that, she worked for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation as Director of Media and External Affairs, beginning in 2016. Wall Street Magazinerising to associate managing editor of The Wall Street Journal and editor of strategic initiatives.

Such a prominent biography makes the tweets I’m about to post even more remarkable, both for the level of annoyance shown by an unworthy PR professional, and for the fact that they come from the PR director of a major international player. . Stern’s tweets also show that the WHO – arrogant and blinkered – has not (a) fully internalized its resistance to accepting airborne science and (b) resists to this day. What could Stern be thinking?

Now I present Stern’s tweets.


From March 11, 2023:

Firstly, Sparrow is a highly qualified specialist.[1]even if Stern treats her like a random Twitter troll.

Further, Sparrow’s question is fully justified. As far as I can tell, @mvankerkhve has not apologized or even expressed regret, unlike the former Chief Scientist of the WHO. Soumya Swaminathan:

Q: Was that your biggest mistake as chief scientist – you didn’t call SARS-CoV-2 airborne?

A: We should have done this much sooner, based on the available evidence, and it cost the organization dearly. You can claim that [the criticism of WHO] unfair, because when it comes to mitigation, we talked about all the methods, including ventilation and camouflage. But at the same time, we did not forcefully say: “This is an airborne virus.” .

Who started Stern. And who must apologize (Hell, if the WHO were yakuza, they would see fit to sacrifice a few figures.) See “COVID-19 and Airborne Transmission: Science Rejected, Lives Lost. Can society be better? for what and how long it took scientists to get WHO to at least to acknowledge the likelihood that Covid is airborne. The WHO’s molasses-like response mattered because the pandemic was spreading exponentially, and each day of delay meant that millions of new people could not protect themselves without proper transmission advice, let alone the government’s there were bad policy recommendations.

Finally, when the PR specialist loses his temper on Twitter and informs the MD that his remarks are “unfounded,” something has gone wrong in the communications department.


From March 12, 2023:

There is nothing “grotesque” about Sparrow’s tweet. Here is the episode Sparrow refers to, from highly respected atmospheric chemist Kimberly Prather:

In the most condescending interpretation, Tedros completely cuts the frame on transmission. In the least merciful interpretation, Tedros walked off the reservation and said the untold truth – “Covid is spreading through the air” – and Ryan pulled his chain and made him not say what he said. In any case, I would have thought that the director of public relations at WHO did his job and made sure that Tedros was properly informed during a press conference at a critical moment during the pandemic, but what of it.

What’s more, when the PR specialist loses his temper on Twitter and tells the MD that his remarks are “grotesque”, something has gone wrong in the communications department.

“Naming and Shame”

From March 13, 2023:

Stern’s touching concern for civility in the face of the failure of WHO policy and communications, which has undoubtedly cost many, many lives, is noted. In addition, “naming and shaming” known tactic in the human rights communityand many see the west’s response to the Covid pandemic through human rights frameworks (indeed, it’s hard to localize the “let’s tear” eugenics policy and No look at this frame). It is possible to debate whether naming and shaming is an effective tactic, but Stern has no good reason to rule it out. a priori.

Then, when the “Group of 36” documented how they forced the WHO to change course to airborne transmission (“COVID-19 and airborne transmission”, above), they included in the correspondence the names and email addresses of every WHO official with whom they communicated. If that’s not “naming and shaming,” then I don’t know what is. And if it in facethen go ahead, I say.

Finally, when the public relations professional starts talking about courtesy instead of solving the immediate problem, something has gone wrong in the communications department.

“All such decisions”

From March 11, 2023:

Readers will immediately notice that Stern’s “drugs/vaccines/tests/treatment” list is missing: ventilation, camouflage, and generally all non-drug interventions. This seems very strange in the midst of an airborne pandemic. But perhaps this is not so strange. The most parsimonious explanation would be that Stern is simply expressing the unspoken views of WHO senior management, and WHO senior management – regardless of the fact that they changed the website for proles – still does not receive transmissionJohn Conley“Chair of the WHO Expert Group on Research and Development in Infection Prevention and Control for COVID-19, which makes key decisions on the research that informs WHO recommendations”, of course not). This thesis is supported by the fact that The infamous WHO tweet of March 28, 2020 is still relevant. Here is a screenshot that shows[2] how even today it is still being read and still causing damage:

If Stern sincerely believed that Covid was spreading through the air, she – and she, as director of public relations, certainly has influence – would have deleted this tweet a long time ago. She doesn’t, so she doesn’t.


One can only wonder what Stern does in the office all day. Once again from the departed and regretful Soumya Swaminathan:

Q: Prior to your arrival at WHO, there was no Chief Scientist position. How has your understanding of this role changed? What would you say to the successor about this?

A: It’s a multifaceted role. , which was not really considered one of the chief scientific officer’s functions.

It seems very strange that the chief research officer becomes a “representative”. Isn’t that a job for the communicators? Stern’s own biography defines her as the “representative” of the CEO, so why does Swaminathan even play such a role? Wikipedia (sorry) defines Communications Director:

The Communications Director is responsible for managing and directing the organization’s internal and external communications. Communications directors supervise public relations officers, develop communication strategies, and contact the media for the organization.

A communications director may also be referred to as a public relations manager, director of communications, or.

This is pure speculation, but it would make sense for Stern to take on the role, especially on a topic as important as Covid. Instead, Tedros was not properly instructed and Swaminathan ended up doing communications work that was not really hers.

To be fair, perhaps Stern sees his job as slapping proles rather than scientific communication. Or maybe she spank the proles is scientific communication. In any case, she still has it, so she is in good standing with her superiors, well done.


[1] @annie_sparrow: “MBBS FRACP MRCP MPH MD. Flying Doctor. Scientist. strategist Worker assistance. Activist. Associate Professor of Global Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.”

[2] Twitter does not give a date for the likes or retweets, but they are listed in reverse chronological order, so this like happened after March 12th.


Here is a photo of Stern’s Twitter profile setting an example for the world:

Ignore Stern’s exposure. Let’s hope that Oscar the cat is not infected, because cats can become infected through close contact (CDC; New infectious diseases).

Printable, PDF and Email