Since the 1980s, hospitals have been replacing copper and brass surfaces with stainless steel. The reason? Copper and brass fade with time, while stainless steel retains its “new” look.
Here’s the thing: unlike stainless steel, copper and brass reduce the transition of disease.
In repeated studies, copper and brass objects have shown to break down bacteria and viruses quickly, when compared to other surfaces.
While COVID-19 can live on other surfaces for 72 hours, it dies on copper surfaces within four hours.
Here’s the thing: we knew this before.
Indeed, the disease prevention benefits of copper trace their ways all the way back to ancient Egypt, and is included on Smith's Papyrus, quite literally the oldest medical document known to man.
So, to recap, despite knowing that brass and copper have disease prevention properties that stainless steel does not possess, hospitals have been eliminating use of copper and brass for the purposes of appearance.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
There seems to be a real disconnect here about the Kyle Rittenhouse verdict. I’ve seen a number of legal experts come in and explain why it shouldn’t have been a surprise that Rittenhouse was acquitted.
There seems to, lately, be this trend that something must be shocking or unexpected to be upsetting, but the reality is for many people that status quo is just as upsetting. Please stop responding to people who are upset with “why are you surprised”?
You help absolutely no one.
Indeed, Rittenhouse was always going to have a good chance at acquittal. Under Wisconsin’s self defense law, he has a right to defend himself from a threat against his life. And the video from that evening makes it clear that such a threat existed. No one debates this.
They also aren’t voiceless. In fact their voices are heard disproportionately more than people who got the vaccines months ago and are desperate for a booster shot to lower their risk of getting infected at all.
Of the Americans who have received at least one COVID-19 vaccination (66%), 76% would like a booster shot.
That means over 50% of Americans have had a COVID shot and want a booster shot.
When’s the last time you heard any of them interviewed?
We make decisions about the stories we tell. We’ve chosen to highlight stories of individuals quitting their jobs or otherwise defying vaccination mandates despite the fact that they make up less than 2% of the population of any of these groups. Why?
We hear a lot about the people refusing to abide by vaccination mandates, but the truth of the matter is that they are a tiny fraction of the populace who have been given a voice that is much louder than they would be able to muster on their own.
Part of it is because people abiding by vaccination mandates isn’t necessarily news. However, it is extremely important that the media and news organizations put these stories into context of the overall population, lest we give the impression that this is a deeper issue.
Raw numbers are fine, but they HAVE to be put into context of the overall population. If you are reporting that X people have resigned, you need to provide the entire population of that workforce for appropriate context.
Too many people seem to think that it is a lack of belief that is keeping people from getting vaccinated, and that some piece of evidence (full FDA approval) will convince them to get vaccinated.
Overall, it won’t.
This isn’t lack of trust. This isn’t fear. It’s stubbornness.
These people are so emotionally invested in being correct—in part because our society has reinforced for decades that changing your mind on something, even when there is new evidence, is somehow a bad thing.
To them, getting a vaccination means admitting they were wrong.
And if there’s one thing they can’t stand it’s the idea of being weak. And so they project their idea of strength (which come across as willful ignorance), which quickly becomes toxic as it is disconnected from all reality and fact, which only emboldens them further.
Indeed, Frances Oldham Kelsey was in charge of approving it by the FDA and refused until additional tests were conducted, despite pressure from the manufacturer.
Her concerns were justified as the birth defects were seen in Europe.
Indeed for her service President Kennedy gave her the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service, and an annual award for FDA service is named in her honor.