From the article:

Health agencies proclaimed that covid was not airborne. That was false.

As a result, their action prescriptions were wrong.

By some estimates, that cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

This was not a straightforward scientific error. It was bad meta-rational judgements: about what sorts of evidence should count, what sorts of reasoning were permissible, and when considerations of purpose should override scientific rationality.

From the beginning, many scientists pointed out the agencies’ mistakes. “Team Airborne” got the key scientific conclusions and policy implications right, by means of meta-rational excellence. Over a year and a half, they forced the agencies to accept airborne covid transmission, and to change government policies accordingly.

[...]

Reasoning may seem a dry and abstract topic. The case studies here are also human tales: of heroism and tragedy, genius and idiocy—sometimes embodied in the same person. Some individual towering figures of public health science both saved millions of lives by getting something right, and killed millions of people by getting something else wrong.

[...]

Two competing theories of disease causes go back a couple thousand years. The germ theory you know. The other blames miasmas, “bad air.” Miasmas smell bad, or maybe the bad smell is the miasma. They behave like smoke or mist, carried about by air currents.

The evidence for the miasma theory is excellent. Miasma rises from sewage, vomit, rotting food, swamps, corpses, and gangrenous wounds. Being around those makes people sick. What do they have in common? Bad smells. This rational argument convinced nearly everyone.

[...]

Eventually the germ theory won. Nevertheless, the miasma theory was sort-of-true, in some sense. That sense turned out to be critical during the covid crisis.

It was also critical in the 1800s. Reformers of the Sanitary Movement convinced governments to build public sewage systems, to provide clean water, to dispose of corpses safely, drain malarial swamps, prevent food spoilage, and disinfect hospitals—all to prevent bad smells. That increased life expectancy, in rich countries, by about fifteen years.

[...]

Nightingale observed that ten times as many patients died of disease than of their wounds. That was hardly surprising: the stench was horrendous. In the mid-1850s, few people doubted the miasma theory, and Nightingale was not one of them.

Her social connections with highly-placed British politicians and officers gave her the clout to make drastic improvements. She recruited a nursing corps, and ran it on quasi-military lines, with a clear chain of command and professional discipline. Her army eliminated all the sources of miasma, cleaning and disinfecting everything. The hospital had few windows; she successfully advocated for ventilation to clear the toxic smells. The mortality rate dropped dramatically under her administration.

After the war, she founded nursing as a skilled profession, wrote the standard textbooks for the field, and created an international network of training schools. She was a leader in the Sanitary Movement, lobbying governments to improve sewerage infrastructure and provide clean water. She also advanced the use of statistics in public health. She was able to demonstrate numerically that reforms she advocated were massively effective.

All this was enormously beneficial—even though its scientific basis was completely false.

[...]

By the 1930s, spray-only transmission was no longer a theory; it was just a fact. Textbook writers compressed out Chapin’s fussy hedging. Respiratory disease germs are transmitted by spray. Period; that’s a fact. Presumably someone had proven it long ago, but it wasn’t worth anyone’s time to look up who or how or when.

There was a single dissenting team: the M.D. Mildred Weeks Wells, her husband the eccentric sanitary engineer William Firth Wells, and two technicians, Edward and Richard Riley. In the 1930s–60s, they conducted a brilliant series of experiments demonstrating airborne disease transmission, plus how it could be prevented with germicidal UV irradiation and/or improved ventilation.

[...]

The Wellses also showed that installing UV in schools cut the rates of measles and chickenpox infection dramatically, but the establishment ignored this until the late 1980s. Then case reports of infection without close proximity finally forced everyone to admit those diseases are airborne. Again, these were already solved problems (in rich countries) due to highly effective vaccines, so UV was considered unnecessary:

The establishment protected the spray theory by rejecting airborne transmission for all other respiratory diseases. Even in cases where there was good evidence for airborne transmission, the official line was that there was no proof. The spray theory was a scientific fact, even if there were a handful of weird exceptions. Any other disease must, therefore, be transmitted only by spray, unless there was absolute proof to the contrary. So, in violation of idealistic scientific norms, authorities treated two competing theories asymmetrically.

They are still doing this! As of August, 2026, the U.S. Center For Disease Control’s page “How flu spreads” asserts spray transmission and makes no mention of airborne. In fact, there’s extensive evidence for airborne flu transmission, which is probably mostly how it spreads. On the other hand, there is zero direct evidence for spray transmission of any respiratory disease, although it’s mechanically plausible. No one has bothered to test whether it occurs at all, because it’s just a fact.

You can find this pattern at the margins of any scientific theory. The theory explains a central domain of solid, well-behaved cases. Then its edges shade into regions where you’d like it to apply, and seems like it ought to apply, but its predictions get increasingly dubious.

[...]

After repeated failures to engage the IPC in rational dialog, Team Airborne concluded that it was fruitless. In July 2020, they went public instead. They published an open letter to the WHO laying out their case, reviewed and signed by 239 prominent scientists from diverse fields.