Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Health & medicine fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about health & medicine. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

13,668 published reviews in this topic

dpaHealth & medicine

Deze overheidsdienaar in India, Soumya Swaminathan, verbood het gebruik van Ivermectine en daardoor wordt nu de doodstraf tegen haar geëist.

Publisher’s rating: Bijzonder weinig hier klopt. Het nieuwsbericht uit 2021 gaat over een ophef die een groep particuliere advocaten veroorzaakte, nadat ze in een openbare kennisgeving Soumya Swaminathan beschuldigden voor het afraden van het gebruik van ivermectine tegen COVID-19. De kennisgeving had geen proces, laat staan mogelijke de doodstraf tot gevolg. Swaminathan werkte toentertijd overigens voor het WHO, en was dus geen Indiase 'overheidsdienaar'.

THIP MediaHealth & medicine

fentanyl smells like popcorn when burnt

Publisher’s rating: False

Related reporting directly rejects the claim that fentanyl smells like burnt popcorn when burned or smoked. It says pure fentanyl has no smell and describes the popcorn association as a myth, adding that smoking a fentanyl-tainted substance does not produce a reliable, distinctive popcorn-like smell. That addresses the claim’s proposed smell as a warning sign, rather than establishing that every substance containing fentanyl has no odor.

First CheckHealth & medicine

Vaping a safe alternative to smoking

Publisher’s rating: No, vaping not a safe alternative to smoking

Related reporting describes a University of New South Wales review that found nicotine-based vapes likely to cause lung or oral cancer and said researchers could not definitively say they are safer than smoking. This research challenges the claim that vaping is a safe alternative, but the excerpt does not establish that vaping is equally or more harmful than smoking.

Folha de S.PauloHealth & medicine

Tuíte em que o deputado federal Osmar Terra (MDB-RS) publica títulos de reportagens da BBC News Brasil, da Associação Médica Brasileira e do G1 e escreve: “Mas não foi só a vacina Astrazeneca retirada da vacinação pelo Ministério da Saúde. A Jansen e a Coronavac também foram. Falta de eficácia e efeitos colaterais com risco, foram alegados. Na verdade não haviam completado os testes quando foram autorizadas pela Anvisa, de forma emergencial. Parte da fase 3 de testagem, foi feito direta em toda população, sem ter ideia ainda do que aconteceria…É isso?”.

Publisher’s rating: Enganoso

The investigation concerns a tweet by federal deputy Osmar Terra that used headlines from BBC News Brasil, the Brazilian Medical Association (AMB) and G1 to suggest that the AstraZeneca, Janssen and CoronaVac vaccines had been withdrawn because of poor efficacy or dangerous side effects, and had been authorized before testing was complete. The article identifies what each headline actually covered and finds that the tweet presented those reports in a way that changed their meaning. The BBC report addressed the Ministry of Health’s recommendation and production decisions concerning AstraZeneca. As the article quotes that report, the interruption was “nada tem a ver com a eficácia,” but was connected to a possible increased risk of thrombosis after vaccination; the Ministry also contemplated using the vaccine if other options were unavailable. The fact-check further says a government document published in April stated that AstraZeneca remained indicated for people aged 40 and over. The AMB headline, meanwhile, concerned the absence of a Ministry request for Butantan to produce more CoronaVac—not withdrawal from the campaign. The article says the Ministry planned to use Butantan-produced doses for children and had contracted to acquire 2.6 million doses. The G1 headline referred to a 2021 suspension of AstraZeneca vaccination for pregnant women, not a general withdrawal of the three vaccines. The source reports that vaccination for all pregnant women resumed in July 2021, with CoronaVac or Pfizer recommended. It also cites Fiocruz’s statement that AstraZeneca continued to be considered safe and effective and that its production agreement remained in force. The evidence described in the article therefore addresses the specific headlines and shows why they do not support Terra’s broader claims about vaccine withdrawal, efficacy or incomplete testing.

THIP MediaHealth & medicine

folic acid supplements are useless and harmful

Publisher’s rating: Mostly False

Research from related reporting does not support the blanket claim that folic acid supplements are useless and harmful. One article on multivitamins says folic acid before and during early pregnancy has strong evidence for lowering neural tube defect risk, and that diet alone may not meet nutritional needs in some life stages. Another reports that supplements can be useful in specific situations, including pregnancy, when taken at the right dose and under medical supervision. These excerpts support a clear use for folic acid; they do not show it is beneficial or necessary for everyone. The evidence also does not establish that folic acid supplements are generally harmful. A report discussing supplements warns that casual use can have risks and that dosage and medical guidance matter, but its examples of substances that can build up and cause harm are vitamins A and D—not folic acid. It explicitly lists pregnancy-related folic acid use among situations where supplements can play a role. The excerpts give a more qualified picture for people with MTHFR variants. One related article says evidence is lacking on whether folic acid or vitamin B supplements reduce risks associated with MTHFR genotype status, while describing them as safe, with toxicity rare. That is not evidence that folic acid is useless or harmful overall; it is a narrower statement about uncertain benefits for that particular genetic context. The supplied material does not include the original THIP Media review, so this explanation is based only on related reporting.