I knew you would get that one Carl!
Here's a couple more from my fields:
During the big Ebola scare, I emailed and posted and communicated to everyone possible that the virus was not capable of causing a widespread outbreak in the US.
However, people's fears of something, often greatly outweigh the risks. It sure doesn't help when the media fans the flames:
The Virus Could Become More Deadly or Transmissible
While there were many sites suggesting the potential for an airborne Ebola virus, the article that probably received the most attention was an op-ed in the New York Times by epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, titled “What We’re Afraid to Say About Ebola.” Osterholm suggested that virologists were “loath to discuss openly but are definitely considering in private” the possibility that “an Ebola virus could mutate to become transmissible through the air.” Because Osterholm is well known in the infectious disease community, his words carried significant weight (though several virologists weighed in to say that such a mutation would be highly unlikely).
Nevertheless, other sites repeated this info, with CNN saying airborne Ebola was “a nightmare that could happen,” and the Daily Mail suggesting airborne Ebola was “very likely;” the Washington Post parroted the question. Pundits were even less reserved, with a Fox News interview suggesting Ebola was “primed to go airborne” and George Will claiming the virus could be spread by a sneeze.
Not only has this not happened, studies were published at that time showing that the Ebola virus genome actually is fairly stable and that no evidence could be found suggesting the virus had mutated to become more dangerous or easier to spread.