· 139 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events May 8, 2026 at 8:22 AM

KLM stewardess does not have Hantavirus, WHO confirms

Posted by turtlepsp


KLM stewardess does not have Hantavirus, WHO confirms - DutchNews.nl
DutchNews.nl
KLM stewardess does not have Hantavirus, WHO confirms - DutchNews.nl
A KLM stewardess, who came into close contact with one of the Hantavirus victims who died, has tested negative for the disease. The World Health Organisation said in a email to journalists that they had been told by their local representatives that the woman had tested negative. She was hospitalised on Wednesday in Amsterdam with mild symptoms. RTL reported on Thursday that 60 people who were on board the KLM flight from Johannesburg to Amsterdam have been identified. They may...

🚩 Report this post

139 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
JP76 3 days ago +665
This is good news (and obviously a relief for her). She was in a brief contact with a person who had hantavirus, before that person was removed from the flight, because she was too ill to fly. If this strain had been that easily transmissible, situation could've become much more severe.
665
littlebittydoodle 3 days ago +104
Curious if anyone knows how they determined she was too ill to fly. Had she made it onto the plane already? Was she unable to walk or having trouble breathing? I’ve never seen someone removed from a flight due to being too ill, and just curious how they determined that.
104
Top_Shower_7869 3 days ago +146
She was literally dying. Like looked like a person that was dying.
146
littlebittydoodle 3 days ago +60
How awful. That poor woman.
60
Solareclipsed 2 days ago +64
Yes, it's terrible that she got so sick and died, but at the same time, she should have taken other people into consideration and not gone on a plane when she was deathly ill with a possibly contagious virus.
64
HonkeyDonkey3000 2 days ago +78
ABC national news interviewed an American that survived the last Hantavirus outbreak (couple of years ago) and **she said her progression of deterioration was so rapid and serious that they intubated her within 2 hours of sickness. It literally was that quick.** I know experts are saying propagation or communicability of hantavirus is FAR less risky as COVID, but the escalation of symptoms is very concerning.
78
littlebittydoodle 2 days ago +28
Yeah that’s terrifying. As well as the potentially very long incubation period. People already refuse to isolate for 5 days for Covid—no one’s going to agree to isolate for 1-2 months!
28
Top_Shower_7869 2 days ago +32
But that’s not what happened with this woman. She had been sick for 6 days already with similar symptoms to her husband who just died because of it and still chose to fly.
32
Follement 2 days ago +24
We'd all fly if we were in her situation. Alone abroad with husbands corpse. Corpse that's already been dead for weeks.
24
These-Maintenance250 2 days ago +12
let people feel superior in their imaginations
12
luluhouse7 16 hr ago +1
Except not everyone is that selfish. Personally I would *never* travel when I knew I was ill with something serious and infectious — even if I had just had my partner die. Same way I’d rather die myself than have someone else’s death on my conscience. It’s not like she was going to be stuck there for another month. She could have waited a week and it would have been fine!
1
Dizzy_5503 1 day ago +3
As a respiratory therapist, I’ve taken care of a few people with Hantavirus and it is quick. Their lungs fill up with fluid and they can’t breathe. They have to be put on a ventilator and many of them die. People aren’t walking around with Hantavirus normally.
3
Gengo0708 1 day ago +8
Easier said than done. It’s been proven people at the end of their life just wants to go home and be with loved ones. It’s a natural body reaction.
8
AdCreepy5165 2 days ago +5
Whats the protocol if someone passes away on an international flight?
5
DecentShadow 2 days ago +8
Not sure if official, but I have read that most carriers have a couple of body bags on the flight for this reason. Also heard of different instances, of once in a body bag, the person being strapped into a seat, placed in a lavatory, kept in one of the FA workspaces, or placed in a crew rest area.
8
WorldlyAd3000 2 days ago +4
Pretty sure her and her husband were the ones that contracted it from that landfill too.
4
littlebittydoodle 2 days ago +2
Did she know she had it?
2
ShakeXXX 3 days ago -135
Incubation period for Hantavirus can be up to 8 weeks.
-135
Limp_Agency161 3 days ago +163
I think the WHO has people who know that.
163
ShakeXXX 3 days ago -136
We’ll know in 8 weeks if the stewardess is truly okay. RemindMe! 8 weeks
-136
AggressiveSkywriting 3 days ago +59
Take off the tinfoil hat. You are nothing close to an expert. You're either just traumatized from covid (understandable) or you're a doomer accelerationist who WANTS this to be some mega plague.
59
Cool_Flamingo6779 3 days ago +64
We know now because they tested her. The potential high end of the incubation period isn't relevant.
64
NAh94 2 days ago +6
The PCR was negative.
6
Ok-Grand-1492 3 days ago +27
There's a test for it that can reveal an infection after only a few days from exposure, even if symptoms aren't showing yet.
27
ShakeXXX 3 days ago -6
She actually had mild symptoms, some that were released with no symptoms are under a 45 day watch. https://www.ctvnews.ca/toronto/article/new-details-released-about-ontario-residents-who-are-in-isolation-after-cruise-ship-outbreak/
-6
ShakeXXX 2 days ago -2
Btw, what's the test called? Nothing came up on a search. [https://search.brave.com/search?q=is+there+a+test+for+hantavirus+that+can+reveal+an+infection+after+only+a+few+days+from+exposure%2C+even+if+symptoms+aren%27t+showing+yet.&source=newtab&conversation=090fd6b01fb76843162a299fe4cbc947b1df&summary=1](https://search.brave.com/search?q=is+there+a+test+for+hantavirus+that+can+reveal+an+infection+after+only+a+few+days+from+exposure%2C+even+if+symptoms+aren%27t+showing+yet.&source=newtab&conversation=090fd6b01fb76843162a299fe4cbc947b1df&summary=1)
-2
Ok-Grand-1492 2 days ago +7
[Antibodies can be detected as early as the prodromal phase of infection (3-7 days).](https://testdirectory.questdiagnostics.com/test/test-detail/37547/hantavirus-antibody-igg-igm?cc=MAST)
7
AyogyaRascal 3 days ago +812
Hopefully this means that "short contact" isn't enough for the virus to spread. Less likelihood for this to become a pandemic
812
Nerdlinger 3 days ago +472
[The evidence has always shown](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9574657/) that hantavirus is not easily transmissible from human to human, if it's transmissible at all.
472
AyogyaRascal 3 days ago +262
Yes, this news just gives relief that it isn't some new novel strain (like COVID) of the Andes variant that can transmit quickly
262
suprachromat 3 days ago +172
Evidence can always change, the Andes strain has been known to be transmissible from human to human but not easily. However, this is a virus, and as we all know, viruses can hit the genetic l****** on occasion.
172
Nerdlinger 3 days ago +33
> the Andes strain has been known to be transmissible from human to human but not easily According to the linked paper, the one study that described human-to-human transmission had issues, like not accounting for contact with infected rodents and their excrement into their model. > The absolute number of cases that may be attributable to human-to-human transmission is low and needs to be contrasted with the much larger number of cases that did not lead to human-to-human transmission, even with similarly close contact in community or health facility settings. For example, the cohort study by Ferres and colleagues included 476 household contacts, of which only 16 subsequently developed HPS, 3 of which were claimed to be definitely due to human-to-human transmission and 9 probably due to human-to-human transmission; the remaining 460 household contacts did not. Their multivariate logistic regression model showed that the odds of infection among contacts were increased for sex partners and with exposure to saliva (deep kissing). However, the possible confounding effect of environmental exposure to the excreta/secreta of infected rodents, which is a known cause of infection, was not considered in this model, though it was considered qualitatively.
33
suprachromat 3 days ago +21
Dude the cruise ship people transmitted it to each other. There’s no question about that, it’s established. So it definitely can jump from human to human, whatever that study says.
21
Zzzzyxas 3 days ago +64
Unless there were rats in the ship. And of you've ever been on a ship, let me tell you, there are rats.
64
Lithorex 3 days ago +21
The only ships that don't have rats are those in drydock and those at the bottom of the sea.
21
futureb1ues 3 days ago +27
I hate to tell you this but the ships in dry-dock also have rats. And come to think of it, the ones on the bottom of the ocean probably contain the skeletons of dumber rats that lacked the flee-a-sinking-ship instinct. I mean, I just assume that if rats really are very human-like that there must be some percentage of the rat population that "does its own research" and calls the other rats sheep for fleeing when the water starts rising.
27
Zaga932 3 days ago +19
> the skeletons of dumber rats that lacked the flee-a-sinking-ship instinct In defense of salty rats all over the globe, the only difference between a fleeing and non-fleeing rat in this scenario is whether the rat's corpse ends up inside or outside the ship.
19
MeatImmediate6549 2 days ago +2
And also mer-rats.
2
Don_Ford 3 days ago +53
The initial couple went bird watching at a literal garbage dump before getting on the cruise. A LITERAL garbage dump.
53
Zzzzyxas 3 days ago +30
They were hiding secret rats in their pockets. The rat king will prevail.
30
UnderADeadOhioSky 2 days ago +9
Tbf a lot of Juneauites will tell tourists to go to the dump if they want to see bald eagles. Its their highest concentration by far.
9
bangonthedrums 3 days ago +12
Or, y’know, it has a long incubation period and literally all the people who got sick were in Argentina prior to boarding the ship. All of them may have been infected directly prior to the cruise There’s three options: 1. Rats in Argentina infected everyone 2. Rats on board ship infected people 3. Humans infected people Not a single one of those is confirmed yet, and personally I feel like #3 is the least likely based on what we know about the disease
12
Flymia 3 days ago +2
This is a fairly small ship high class ship, but yes likely still has rats. But given the timeline it seems the subject x did not get it on the ship.
2
ryan30z 3 days ago +50
> There’s no question about that, it’s established. While it might end up being the case, this is categorically false at this point.
50
Flymia 3 days ago -6
So the doctor hung out with the rats too?
-6
ask-me-about-my-cats 2 days ago +9
I mean he was on the same ship as the patients, wasn't he? Who's to say he didn't have the same rodent exposure they did?
9
ofbrightlights 2 days ago +9
He wasn't bird watching in a landfill
9
FlyingDreamWhale67 2 days ago +2
Not necessarily, but the doctor *was* around the patients who did have it. Medical care counts as prolonged close contact.
2
Flymia 2 days ago +3
Right that is my point, it clearly has human to human. But not easily transmitted, I hope.
3
ryan30z 2 days ago +1
Way to completely miss the point of what I wrote.
1
Nerdlinger 3 days ago +42
> Dude the cruise ship people transmitted it to each other. There’s no question about that, it’s established. Where exactly has that been established?
42
lesath_lestrange 3 days ago
On the cruise ship.
0
ObjectiveGlittering 3 days ago -6
What cruise ship?
-6
whiskeytab 3 days ago +6
the one from Speed 2
6
InformalWish 3 days ago +7
The one in the ocean.
7
FerretBueller 3 days ago +2
Which ocean?
2
These-Maintenance250 2 days ago +1
the one whose front fell off
1
Flymia 3 days ago +6
A doctor on the ship got it from the couple that died. How else did he get it. It transmitted. But he was in close contact.
6
mpjjpm 2 days ago +7
He may have been exposed to rat droppings in the same manner as passengers, either on shore before departure or on the ship.
7
Pledgeofmalfeasance 2 days ago
"Deep kissing" 🫠
0
Don_Ford 3 days ago -22
Yeah, no, I read a case study today from the 2018-19 outbreak, and it's definitely human-to-human without question... but you need to be in spitting distance. People spit a lot when they talk, and they are infectious for the first day of fever.
-22
Nerdlinger 3 days ago +21
> Yeah, no, I read a case study today from the 2018-19 outbreak, and it's definitely human-to-human without question Do you think the authors of this linked review of papers on this strain of the virus from 2021 did not read that case study from 2018-2019?
21
Plane_Discipline_198 2 days ago
They can "hit the l******" like you said, but unless I'm mistaken, I think most virus mutations happen from transmission to a new host. Less contagious = less likely to mutate. It's a big part of the reason coronaviruses are so tricky to vaccinate against; they're very contagious so have plenty of changes to mutate.
0
slimj091 3 days ago +41
To be fair virus's can mutate and become more transmissible than previous strains and mutations were. However the clue that this is not so in this case is that many more people on the ship would have died or become seriously ill by now if such a mutation like that would have occurred. With HPS being nearly a coin flip on whether an infected person will die if they don't get immediate medical care. That and it's 3 to 6 week incubation time where it is not contagious doesn't fit the narrative that talking heads and clickbaiters have been trying to make.
41
No_Conversation_9325 3 days ago +7
2018 outbreak in Argentina well observed and documented though.
7
Pledgeofmalfeasance 2 days ago +2
Viruses don't stay the same forever. Remember all the COVID strains?
2
TheoremaEgregium 3 days ago +14
It's a probabilities game. There is no "this is too short" switching to "now you're catching it for sure."
14
SuchProcedure4547 3 days ago -10
My understanding is that there is also only one very specific strain of the virus that can spread from human to human. I think it's the Andes strain or something.
-10
fiendishrabbit 3 days ago +23
The cruise ship outbreak is confirmed Andes strain. However, even that strain is normally not very infectious (but exceptionally nasty if you do get it).
23
Aldryg 3 days ago -7
One strain, so far. That can unfortunately chage do to an unlucky mutation.
-7
CndConnection 3 days ago +29
Thank god for her and the world.
29
zalurker 3 days ago +115
I'd rather that they have an overabundance of caution than the opposite.
115
RumHamComesback 3 days ago +59
The media really badly wants this one to become a pandemic when in reality it's nowhere near as easily transmissible as Covid. They are screening people as per contact tracing out of an abundance of caution not because we are in for another pandemic.
59
ZenandHarmony 3 days ago +13
It was never a big deal.
13
mokutou 21 hr ago +1
Agreed. It’s simply not the right type of virus for a pandemic. Even if it mutated to make it that kind of virus, it would require such a huge genetic change that it would take many years and a require a large infection vector pool.
1
Capital_Past69 3 days ago +92
I do not have Hantavirus either, I confirm
92
mindfulmu 3 days ago +56
Ill need a stool, blood and a 8 by 10 picture of your gentials to confirm.
56
ThisSiteIsAgony 3 days ago +21
Inches or centimeters? Asking for a friend
21
mindfulmu 3 days ago +12
8 by 10 inches photograph, ideally signed.
12
globetheater 3 days ago +2
Famous last words
2
Capital_Past69 3 days ago +2
Aged like milk. I now have Hantavirus. What I thought were chocolate chips were actually rat poop. 😞
2
Cyborg_Ninja_Pirate 3 days ago +2
I deny your confirmation.
2
takesthebiscuit 3 days ago -3
Tbf you can’t confirm, unless you have done the necessary tests
-3
Capital_Past69 3 days ago +6
I don’t want to be Frank though
6
Mobile-Bar7732 2 days ago +1
Surely you can't be serious.
1
Goodswimkarma 3 days ago +19
Yay! I do not want a pandemic!
19
Scaryclouds 2 days ago +5
“We are CANCELLING the apocalypse” /- WHO (probably)
5
SilverAssumption9572 3 days ago +30
Not to be "that guy" but the KLM employee in this case, is a man. So, maybe "flight attendant" instead of "stewardess" here.
30
Black_Bear_US 3 days ago +35
The first two sentences of the article: "A KLM stewardess, who came into close contact with one of the Hantavirus victims who died, has tested negative for the disease. The World Health Organisation said in a email to journalists that they had been told by their local representatives that **the woman** had tested negative."
35
klauwaapje 3 days ago +21
Where did you get that the employee is a man. Dutch news is definitely talking about a woman
21
Potato4 3 days ago +65
Should be flight attendant either way these days
65
OgthaChristie 3 days ago +23
I'm actually beginning to think there are TWO different flight attendants who were exposed and the woman is negative and the man is positive, because I've heard two different things in the course of 24 hours. I hope I'm wrong.
23
yahwehforlife 3 days ago +8
Two different flights and flight attendants one was on the first flight that the positive woman completed and the other was on the flight that the positive woman was kicked off
8
ItsmeKristy 2 days ago +5
Yes it's so weird. There is a sick stewardess in the hospital with confirmed hantavirus says dutch news. Then other news outlets say no human transmission but stewardess with hantavirus is still confirmed but also flight attendant tests negative. It's like even the journalists can't get the panic right. Media be like so busy with 'do we need to lockdown' clickbait titles we forget to factcheck the actual facts.
5
Bigdaddyjlove1 3 days ago +4
Or "steward"
4
UllaIvo 3 days ago -37
You are being that guy. KLM is a Dutch flight and we don't deal with that bullshit as in the states
-37
ryan30z 3 days ago +12
Why would you write this?
12
Nick1693 2 days ago +5
The English language deals with this. Actor vs. actress, comedian vs. comedienne, executor vs. executrix. One of these examples, relevant here, is "steward" vs. "stewardess".
5
Deshes011 3 days ago +22
That 2 month incubation period is what worries me. Can they test for the Hanta before it shows symptoms?
22
whatever5454 3 days ago +43
The flight attendant is currently sick with something. That something is not the Hanta, which is the good news discussed in this article. The article indicates that people who had close contact with the sick passenger are still being monitored.
43
Limp_Agency161 3 days ago +66
The WHO will have people who know what's up.
66
arveena 3 days ago -29
I mean like when they said the risk of a global pandemic was very low for covid and its not airborne. After it ravaged two months through hospitals in Wuhan killing doctors in PPE? Just look up the WHOs tweets from January 2020
-29
_goblinette_ 3 days ago +45
You clearly weren’t paying enough attention in January 2020 because I got the message loud and clear that this was a potential pandemic. 
45
linuxlova 3 days ago +14
the WHO isnt an organization of seers with predictions of 100% accuracy.  most of the time their educated guesses are correct, but covid was a novel and unpredictable virus. they didn't say the risk was low, they said that there was potential for it to become a widespread issue. they just didn't have evidence at the time to give a guarantee. 
14
FlyingDreamWhale67 2 days ago +4
Did you and I read the same tweets? WHO clearly stated that it did(does) have pandemic potential. They were working with little info because A: it was a novel virus and B: the Chinese government was working hard to cover it up until it couldn't anymore. That's the biggest difference. The virus causing panic now is not a novel one, we've known about it for over 30 years at this point. There's countless research papers and articles about it, some of them in WHO's own website. Even the CDC has papers about it. It's not hard to look it up.
4
One-Dog8812 3 days ago -31
That's what we thought in 2019 as well, and very early 2020...
-31
POTUSDORITUSMAXIMUS 3 days ago +39
They did warn us and tell us exactly what to do. Half the planet just didnt listen to them.....
39
_goblinette_ 3 days ago +18
The reason they were testing this woman in the first place is because she was showing symptoms of an illness. 
18
[deleted] 3 days ago +8
[deleted]
8
Cool_Flamingo6779 3 days ago +7
RT-qPCR which is almost certainly what they used can detect hantavirus during the incubation period.
7
lostroadrunner22 3 days ago +4
Why would Roger Daltry know this?
4
mandalore237 3 days ago +4
He's seen a lot of suspected cases but won't get fooled again
4
Head_Dragonfruit6859 2 days ago +2
Isn’t the incubation period 6 weeks?
2
NUMBERS2357 3 days ago +4
I assume this is a KLM stewardess that it was previously reported had some exposure, they aren't just announcing that there's a random KLM stewardess out there who doesn't have hantavirus.
4
Miss_Speller 3 days ago +14
Sigh. Literally the first sentence of the article: >A KLM stewardess, who came into close contact with one of the Hantavirus victims who died, has tested negative for the disease.
14
Michoffkoch87 3 days ago +10
Nobody reads the articles, they only react to the apocalyptic headlines.
10
NUMBERS2357 1 day ago +1
... yes I know, it was a joke about the headline sounding weird out of context.
1
lordreed 2 days ago +1
Thank Andromeda. We don't want another covid or ebola situation.
1
FineBumblebee8744 1 day ago +1
I thought we called them 'flight attendants' now?
1
SweetAlyssumm 2 days ago
Stewardess? 1970 was several decades ago. The person referenced is a flight attendant.
0
snaresamn 3 days ago -15
That's great news Updates and more r/hanta26
-15
Audstarwars1998 3 days ago -26
Doesn't have it yet.  They were tested 11 days after exposure.  11 that's it.  Remember covid?  This thing can take up to 8 weeks.  
-26
sgthombre 3 days ago +32
Whoa good thing you were able to make this observation, I'm sure the World Health Organization would never have thought of this and have no idea how/when to test for this.
32
Audstarwars1998 3 days ago -10
They literally got everything wrong about covid so forgive me for bring skeptical
-10
greystripes9 3 days ago +1
It is good to be prepared at this point. I remember being told “corona virus” was not a big deal. I thought it would be more like SARs until people traveled and it mutated like crazy. Seems like they are more cautious now though.
1
Audstarwars1998 2 days ago -3
Hopefully so.  I'm getting down voted like crazy.  They need to test her again in 2 weeks to be 100 percent sure. 
-3
MindOk8618 3 days ago -39
I don't believe WHO for certain reason.
-39
michal_hanu_la 3 days ago +18
OK? Who cares who you believe? (Now if you explained _reasons that one should not_, you might have a point, but you didn't.)
18
MindOk8618 3 days ago -5
No one cares if you ptsd over last pandemic either.
-5
michal_hanu_la 2 days ago +2
Good. Was that a response to something someone said?
2
Quiet-Sky6990 3 days ago -32
Calling it now its going to be just as contagious as covid, in a "unprecedented" evolution
-32
Audstarwars1998 3 days ago -18
People are celebrating when the attendant was tested only 11 days after exposure.  I guess no one remembers covid. And this thing can take as long as 8 weeks.  They need to give results in another 2 weeks.  
-18
complenerz 3 days ago +17
They got tested because they are sick... So yes it is great news that it's not hantavirus.
17
Audstarwars1998 3 days ago -6
They still need to test her in 2 weeks 
-6
Quiet-Sky6990 3 days ago -13
100% with how everything is being handled Covid 2.0 will be inevitable.
-13
Lamontyy 3 days ago -9
They've already turned her into paste 😞🥀
-9
[deleted] 3 days ago -12
[deleted]
-12
Fat_Pizza_Boy 3 days ago -45
Thanks goddess that she also didn’t have prostate problem!
-45
Baystars2025 3 days ago -41
Could be transgender
-41
← Back to Board