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

Koken op gas is niet slecht voor de gezondheid en TNO heeft dit ook niet beweerd.

Publisher’s rating: De bewering is onwaar. TNO concludeert weldegelijk dat koken op gas gezondheidsrisico’s met zich meebrengt. Bij het verbranden van aardgas komen namelijk ultrafijnstof en schadelijke gassen als stikstofdioxide (NO2), koolstofmonoxide (CO) en methaan vrij, die onder andere kunnen bijdragen aan de ontwikkeling van astma bij kinderen.

The claim concerns a Facebook post arguing both that cooking with gas is not unhealthy and that TNO did not conclude that it poses health risks. The review examines those assertions through TNO research cited in a CLASP report, and statements from TNO researcher Piet Jacobs to dpa. It reports that TNO’s findings do identify health risks associated with gas cooking, including pollutants released when natural gas burns. The review distinguishes pollution from cooking food from pollution caused by the gas itself. TNO says most particulate matter during cooking comes from activities such as frying meat and stir-frying vegetables, whatever the heat source. But the review also describes measurements documented in a TNO report showing ultrafine particles released by gas combustion, and quotes Jacobs confirming that they are emitted even without a pan. It additionally reports that nitrogen dioxide from burning natural gas can contribute to childhood asthma, while carbon monoxide and ultrafine particles may also contribute to asthma symptoms in children. The review notes that TNO’s 2019 advice to switch to electric or induction cooking was principally motivated by nitrogen dioxide, and applied especially to people in airtight homes with insufficient ventilation. That qualification narrows the advice; it does not support the post’s assertion that TNO found no health risks.

dpaHealth & medicine

De verpakking van het Astrazeneca-vaccin toont aan dat het al klaar was in 2018, bewijs dat de pandemie gepland was.

Publisher’s rating: De foto werd vervalst om een foute datum uit 2018 toe te voegen en circuleert al zeker sinds de zomer van 2021. Het is dan ook geen bewijs dat de pandemie op voorhand gepland werd.

The claim concerns a photo of an empty AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine package that appears to show the date 15 July 2018. Posts presented that date as evidence the pandemic had been arranged in advance, since it predates the pandemic’s disruption of daily life in 2020. The review examined the image itself and compared it with an earlier version, rather than treating the date shown in the circulated image as proof of when the package or vaccine existed. Using a reverse-image search, the review traced the original photo to a Twitter post from 15 November 2020. It reports that the background’s pale wooden surface and a ring-light reflection in the upper-left corner match the circulated image. In the earlier version, however, the alleged date is absent: the small upper-left flap instead shows the number sequence “108438/3.” The review also notes visible differences in the added date’s color, typeface, and weight compared with the other package text. Together, the matching photographic details and the changed flap content support the conclusion that the 2018 date was added to the image. The review places the image’s circulation in context: it says the same claim had appeared by summer 2021 and had already been debunked by multiple fact-checkers. It also reports that the first clinical tests for developing the AstraZeneca vaccine began in the United Kingdom in January 2020, while the first notification from Wuhan of a newly detected virus dates to 31 December 2019. The package image therefore does not establish that the vaccine or pandemic was planned in 2018.

dpaHealth & medicine

Nadat het "vaccin" was uitgerold, heeft de FAA in het geheim de ECG parameters voor piloten verruimd zodat ze toch konden blijven vliegen.

Publisher’s rating: De FAA geeft iedere maand openbaar aan welke wijzigingen er in de gids voor medische examinatoren worden gemaakt. Er is dus niets in het geheim veranderd. De eisen voor een ECG zijn niet volledig veranderd. Er is alleen een wijziging geweest in de categorisering voor één milde hartritmestoornis: eerstegraads AV-blok. Dat gebeurde op aanbeveling van cardiologen. Piloten worden nog steeds uitgebreid gecontroleerd op gezondheidsproblemen. Er is geen enkel bewijs dat deze wijziging of de hartritmestoornis in kwestie een link hebben met de coronavaccins.

First CheckHealth & medicine

Beauty products, home remedies can make you fairer

Publisher’s rating: False, most fairness creams contain hydroquinone, corticosteroids, or mercury, ingredients that are known to have harmful side effects, when used without medical consultation. They can cause scarring, discolouration, reduce immunity, increase the risk of skin cancer as well as neurological issues.

dpaHealth & medicine

Chitine, dat in insecten zit, heeft eenzelfde effect op het lichaam als het inslikken van asbest.

Publisher’s rating: Er bestaat nog geen wetenschappelijke consensus over de eenduidige link tussen het binnen krijgen van asbest en darmkanker; die wordt nog onderzocht. Chitine heeft alvast niets met darmkanker te maken; de stof is veilig voor menselijke consumptie.

The review examines a claim circulated in a Twitter post by plastic surgeon Jeff Hoeyberghs and shared in Facebook posts: consuming chitin powder supposedly affects the body like swallowing asbestos fibers, and causes bowel cancer. The review says the post linked to an article whose headline suggested a connection between asbestos and bowel cancer, but whose text did not establish that link. It reports that researchers had studied the question, but had not reached a consensus. The review distinguishes swallowing asbestos from inhaling its fibers. It says the Belgian waste agency OVAM did not classify swallowing asbestos as dangerous, while inhaling asbestos fibers has long been associated with increased risk of lung and pleural cancer. These points do not establish that swallowing asbestos is harmless in every circumstance; they address the specific comparison made in the claim and the evidence described in the review. On chitin, the review identifies it as a substance found in insects, shrimp, and fungi, and says people produce the enzyme chitinase, which processes it. It reports no evidence that chitin causes bowel cancer, and says digestion of the substance activates the immune system. The review therefore finds no support for the asserted chitin–asbestos equivalence or the alleged bowel-cancer effect.

dpaHealth & medicine

Coronavirus uit het Latijn vertaalt betekent "hartaanvalvirus".

Publisher’s rating: Een vertaling van "cor ona virus" uit het Latijn is niet hartaanvalvirus, dat laat een professor Latijnse Taal en Literatuur aan Deutsche Presse-Agentur weten. Google Translate is niet de meest betrouwbare vertaalmachine, zeker niet voor het Latijn.

The claim concerns a supposed Latin translation of “cor ona virus” as “heart attack virus.” The review traces the result to Google Translate rather than to a reliable translation of the coronavirus’s name. It reports that the shared screenshot showed the machine’s output and that the unusual result could be produced by inserting double spaces between the words. dpa tested the phrase itself: with ordinary spacing, the tool returned “coronavirus”; with double spaces between syllables, or with “Cor” capitalized, it returned the claimed wording. The review therefore describes the result as dependent on manipulating the input, not as the meaning of the name. The review also consulted Antje Wessels, a professor of Latin Language and Literature at Leiden University. She explained that Latin “corona” means “wreath” and is unrelated to “cor,” meaning “heart.” The review says the virus was given the name because its outer layers resemble a wreath or crown around the virus particle. It further notes that “ona” is not a standalone Latin word, so splitting the name into these pieces does not establish the proposed translation. The key distinction is between a tool’s output under altered spacing or capitalization and the meaning of the Latin words. The review says Google Translate left “virus” unchanged, although Latin dictionaries give it meanings including “slime” or “poison.” Its account thus does not treat the tool’s output as a literal, grammatical translation of the full name.

FACTLYHealth & medicine

Omicron XBB ರೂಪಾಂತರವನ್ನು ಗುರುತಿಸುವುದು ಸುಲಭವಲ್ಲ. ಈ ರೂಪಾಂತರವು ಕೆಮ್ಮು ಮತ್ತು ಶೀತ ರೋಗಲಕ್ಷಣಗಳನ್ನು ಉಂಟುಮಾಡುವುದಿಲ್ಲ. ಇದು  ಡೆಲ್ಟಾ ರೂಪಾಂತರಕ್ಕಿಂತ 5 ರಷ್ಟು ಹೆಚ್ಚು ಅಪಾಯಕಾರಿ ಮತ್ತು ಹೆಚ್ಚಿನ ಮರಣ ಪ್ರಮಾಣವನ್ನು ಹೊಂದಿವೆ.

Publisher’s rating: MISLEADING