I'm summarizing my understanding of these panpsychism type theories.

In general:

It is hypothesized that contact with a single microscopic seed crystal of the new polymorph can be enough to start a chain reaction causing the transformation of a much larger mass of material.[5] Widespread contamination with such microscopic seed crystals may lead to the impression that the original polymorph has "disappeared". In a few cases, such as progesterone and paroxetine hydrochloride, the disappearance gradually spread across the world, and it is suspected that it is because Earth's atmosphere has over time become permeated with tiny seed crystals. It is believed that seeds as small as a few million molecules (about 10−15 grams) are sufficient for converting one morph to another, making unwanted disappearance of morphs particularly difficult to prevent.[3] It is hypothesized that "unintentional seeding" may also be responsible for a related phenomenon, where a previously difficult-to-crystallize compound becomes easier to crystallize over time.[5]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearing_polymorph

The actual thing I was thinking of and not my butchered spelling:

During development—ritonavir was introduced in 1996—only the crystal form now called form I was found; however, in 1998, a lower free energy,[54] more stable polymorph, form II, was discovered. This more stable crystal form was less soluble, which resulted in significantly lower bioavailability. The compromised oral bioavailability of the drug led to temporary removal of the oral capsule formulation from the market.[53] As a consequence of the fact that even a trace amount of form II can result in the conversion of the more bioavailable form I into form II, the presence of form II threatened the ruin of existing supplies of the oral capsule formulation of ritonavir; and indeed, form II was found in production lines, effectively halting ritonavir production.[52] Abbott withdrew the capsules from the market, and prescribing physicians were encouraged to switch to a Norvir suspension.[55] It has been estimated that Abbott lost more than US$250 million as a result, and the incident is often cited as a high-profile example of disappearing polymorphs.[56]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ritonavir

But thanks for actually asking.

And sorry I guess for being off a decade, names and dates aren't as easy for me as concepts and science.

There was a recent Verstasium video about it.

There isn’t enough hard science to prove it either way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_problem_of_consciousness

if it is the case we will still need a word for what consciousness did mean

awareness

Sounds a little hippy to me

Yeah...

Because it is?

Quantum physics has been proposed to be part of the solution for the mystery of consciousness. In particular the holistic character of quantum entanglement might provide an answer to the binding problem14. In the 1990s, Penrose and Hameroff proposed a theory of consciousness based on quantum computations in MTs15,16,17,18. Computational modeling suggested that electron resonance transfer among aromatic amino acid tryptophan (Trp) rings in tubulin (subunits of MTs) in a quantum electronic process could play roles in consciousness19. Craddock et al. showed that anesthetic molecules might bind in the same regions and hence result in loss of consciousness20. In a recent experiment, Zhang et al. observed a connection between electronic states and vibrational states in tubulin and MTs21. However, quantum electronic coherence beyond ultrafast timescales demands more supporting evidence and has been recently challenged experimentally22. In contrast, quantum spin coherence could be preserved for much longer timescales23. For example, Fisher has proposed that phosphorus nuclear spins could be entangled in networks of Posner molecules, , which could form the basis of a quantum mechanism for neural processing in the brain24. However, this particular spin-based model also requires more supporting evidence and recently has faced experimental challenges25.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-10068-4

Most people just can't understand that shit, so when someone talks about it in easy to use terms, it sounds "a little hippy".

Like, that's where the hippies got their words from in the first place bro...

"Vibing" is an accurate scientific description of two consciousnesses that are agreeable with each other. The people saying it don't always understand it, but most of what "hippies" say about consciousness is pretty fucking accurate.

Why not leave consciousness alone

Why keep insisting the people who always used the term correctly stop because it doesn't match the simplified version you were taught decades ago in jr high?

Science isn't a philosophy, its a process for approaching the truth. Yes, I can't prove what I am saying and it is based more on a strong feeling than direct proof. I think the question of consciousness is a particularly important one, and we know very little about it still.