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.

13,672 published reviews in this topic

Deutsche Presse-AgenturHealth & medicine

Alle Grundlagen der Pandemie sind hinfällig, weil die vorhandenen Tests keine Aussage über die Ansteckungsgefahr einer Person treffen und PCR-Tests keine lebenden Viren nachweisen können.

Publisher’s rating: Faucis Aussagen zu PCR- und Antigen-Tests sind nicht neu - und sie haben keinen Einfluss auf die Einschätzung einer pandemischen Lage durch die Weltgesundheitsorganisation. Ein positives PCR-Testergebnis belegt mit sehr hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit eine bestehende oder kürzlich überstandene Corona-Infektion.

Deutsche Presse-AgenturHealth & medicine

Laut einer aktuellen Pressemeldung müssen alle Geimpften in den Wintermonaten in Quarantäne - sonst riskieren sie eine schwere Erkrankung.

Publisher’s rating: Die Informationen sind erstens nicht aktuell und zweitens irreführend. Es handelt sich um die Übersetzung eines englischsprachigen Blogeintrags aus dem August 2021. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt waren bereits sehr viele Menschen in Israel geimpft, damit stieg auch der Anteil geimpfter Menschen unter Krankenhauspatienten. Zudem lag die Impfung bei vielen schon viele Monate zurück.

maharat-newsHealth & medicine

اليابان تصمم لقاح ضد كورونا يعطي مناعة "مدى الحياة"

Publisher’s rating: صحيح

The review examines a claim that Japan is developing a COVID-19 vaccine capable of providing lifelong immunity. It describes work led by Michinori Kohara, an honorary researcher at the Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Medical Science, who began considering in early 2020 whether a vaccine based on the smallpox vaccine could offer durable protection. In April 2020, Kohara and Japan’s National Institute of Infectious Diseases began developing a recombinant vaccine using a non-disease-causing vaccinia-virus strain as a carrier for SARS-CoV-2 genetic material. The review presents lifelong protection as the project’s aim or potential, not as an established result in people. [S1: “تساءل الباحث الفخري في معهد طوكيو متروبوليتان للعلوم الطبية ميشينوري كوهارا، بعد وقت قصير من بدء الوباء، في أوائل عام 2020، عما إذا كان من الممكن تطوير لقاح يعتمد على لقاح الجدري”] [S1: “في أبريل 2020، بدأ كوهارا، بالتعاون مع المعهد الوطني للأمراض المعدية، في تطوير فيروس لقاح مأشوب يحتوي على بروتين لفيروس سارس-كوف-2”] The evidence described in the review is preliminary. It reports that laboratory results showed broad activity against variants including Delta, while effectiveness against Omicron was still to be tested. The review also reports Kohara’s expectation that the vaccine could produce strong neutralizing antibodies and cellular immunity, but it gives no clinical-trial results demonstrating lifelong protection in people. [S1: “كما أكدت النتائج المخبرية أيضًا الفعالية الواسعة للقاح ضد متغيرات فيروس كورونا، بما في ذلك دلتا، وأضاف أن اللقاح سيظهر على الأرجح فعاليته ضد متغير أوميكرون في الاختبارات القادمة.”] [S1: “يتمتع اللقاح الذي يعمل عليه كوهارا أن ينتج أجسامًا مضادة معادلة قوية في غضون أسبوع من التلقيح ويحفز أقوى مناعة خلوية مقابل أي لقاح”] The review’s own account places clinical testing in the future: it says Noblepharma was scheduled to conduct the first two trial phases in Japan in the first half of 2023, with 150–200 volunteers. It describes a final trial phase as conditional on confirmed safety and effectiveness, and marketing as possible in 2024 at the earliest. Thus, the article concerns the same Japanese vaccine project, but its details describe a candidate under development and a planned testing pathway—not a demonstrated, available vaccine proven to protect people for life. [S1: “ومن المقرر أن تجري شركة نوبل فارما لصناعة الأدوية المحلية المرحلتين الأولى والثانية من التجارب السريرية للقاح كوهارا في اليابان خلال النصف الأول من عام 2023 على 150 إلى 200 متطوع”] [S1: “وإذا تم تأكيد الفعالية والسلامة، فمن المقرر أن تبدأ المرحلة النهائية من التجربة السريرية على الفور بعد ذلك، والبدء بالتسويق عام 2024 على أقرب تقدير.”]

El Detector/ Univision NoticiasHealth & medicine

Flurona (la infección conjunta del coronavirus y la influenza) es una nueva cepa del coronavirus

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The review examined claims made in comments on Univision Noticias’ Facebook page about flurona, described in the article as simultaneous infection with influenza and the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. It specifically addressed the assertion that this coinfection is a coronavirus strain, alongside other claims about vaccines, ordinary flu, and whether coinfections had occurred. The review says it checked the recurring claims using statements from World Health Organization (WHO) epidemiologist Abdi Mahamud, official data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and WHO, and a study on dual infection. The central distinction in the review is between a coinfection—two pathogens infecting a person at the same time—and a strain or variant of the coronavirus. Its conclusion is that flurona is not a new coronavirus strain: the article says there are variants of SARS-CoV-2, but no new strain was produced in this case. The term therefore refers to the simultaneous infections, not to a newly identified coronavirus strain. The review also supplies context that counters the suggestion that coinfection is unprecedented. It reports that WHO technical lead Maria Van Kerkhove said this “can happen and has happened throughout the pandemic,” and quotes Mahamud describing the simultaneous infection as possible and documented. These statements support the article’s distinction between a reported coinfection and the emergence of a new coronavirus strain.

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaHealth & medicine

FACT CHECK: ඔමික්‍රෝන් වෛරස ප්‍රභේදය එන්නත්වලින් පාලනය කල නොහැකි බවට විශේෂඥ වෛද්‍ය පද්මා ගුණරත්නගෙන් ප්‍රකාශයක්?

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

The claim concerns a headline and social-media posts attributing to Sri Lanka Medical Association president Dr. Padma Gunaratne the statement that vaccines could not control Omicron. The review traces the posts to coverage of an SLMA media briefing held in Colombo on December 2, 2021, and says that a December 3 headline in the Divaina newspaper was the basis for the misleading posts. The review reports that it watched the full briefing video and found no instance in which Gunaratne said Omicron could not be controlled by vaccines. [S1: “දෙසැම්බර් මාසයේ දෙවන දින වෛද්‍ය සංගමය විසින් පවත්වන ලද මාධ්‍ය සාකච්ඡාවක් පිළිබදව වාර්තාකරණය කිරීමේදී දෙසැම්බර් 3 දා ,දිවයින පුවත්පත විසින් තබන ලද නොමග යවන සුලු ශිර්ෂ පාඨයක් පදනම් කර ගනිමින් මෙම නොමග යවන සුලු සටහන් ව්‍යාප්ත වී ඇති බවයි.”; “එම සම්පූර්ණ වීඩියෝවම නැරඹූ අපට දැකගන්නට ලැබුණේ වෛද්‍ය පද්මා ගුණරත්න විසින් කිසිදු අවස්ථාවක ඔමික්‍රෝන් වෛරස් ප්‍රභේදය එන්නත්වලින් පාලනය කල නොහැකි බවට ප්‍රකාශයක් සිදු නොකරන බවයි.”] Instead, the review says she described a possible reduction in vaccine protection against Omicron, while emphasizing vaccination as an important means of protection. It reports that she urged older people, people with chronic illnesses, and frontline workers to get a booster as soon as possible. The review also says she expected vaccines to retain some protection against Omicron, even if protection might be lower. [S1: “කොවිඩ් එන්නත් මගින් ඉතා විශාල ආරක්ෂාවක් පෙර ප්‍රභේද කෙරෙහි පැවතුනද, ඔමික්‍රෝන් ප්‍රභේදය කෙරෙහි එය එතරම් නොවෙන්නට ඉඩ ඇති බවට මෙන්ම මෙම නව ප්‍රභේදය මගින් එම ආරක්ෂාව කෙරෙහි යම්කිසි බලපෑමක් වන්නට ඉඩ ඇති බවට විද්‍යාඥයන් අතර යම් විශ්වාසයක් ගොඩනැගෙමින් පවතින බවයි.”; “එන්නත මගින් ලබාදෙන ආරක්ෂාවේ සම්පූර්ණ අඩුවීමක් ඔමික්‍රෝන් ප්‍රභේදය යටතේ අපේක්ෂා නොකරන අතර, යම් ආකාර ආරක්ෂාවේ අඩුවීමක් තිබිය හැකි වුවද එන්නත් මගින් යම් ආරක්ෂාවක් ඔමික්‍රෝන් ප්‍රභේදයටද ලබාගත හැකි නිසා එන්නත් ලබාගැනීම වැදගත් බවයි ඇය සදහන් කරන්නේ.”] The distinction is between a possible weakening of protection and a claim that vaccines cannot control the variant. The review concludes that Gunaratne made the former point, not the attributed absolute claim. [S1: “අප විසින් සිදු කරන ලද කරුණු විමසා බැලීමේදී තහවුරු වූවේ ඔමික්‍රෝන් ප්‍රභේදය එන්නත්වලින් පාලනය කල නොහැකි බවට ශ්‍රී ලංකා වෛද්‍ය සංගමයේ සභාපතිනිය වන වෛද්‍ය පද්මා ගුණරත්න විසින් ප්‍රකාශ කර නොමැති බවයි. ඇය විසින් සඳහන් කර ඇත්තේ, ඔමික්‍රෝන් ප්‍රභේදය හමුවේ එන්නතින් ලැබෙන ආරක්ෂාවේ යම් අඩුවක් සිදුවිය හැකි වුවත් වෛරසය හමුවේ සටනේදී ප්‍රධානම අවිය වන්නේ එන්නත්කරණය බවයි.”]

El Detector/ Univision NoticiasHealth & medicine

En dos años de pandemia nadie tuvo gripe y covid al mismo tiempo

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim was that no one had influenza and COVID-19 at the same time during the pandemic. The review identifies that as one of the recurring assertions made by users commenting on Univision Noticias’ Facebook page about flurona, meaning simultaneous infection with influenza and the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. The article says this assertion was false. The key evidence is the account of Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization’s technical lead for COVID-19: she said coinfection “can occur and has occurred throughout the pandemic.” The review also reports that WHO epidemiologist Abdi Mahamud described such infection as possible and documented. This directly contradicts the claim that there had been no cases during the pandemic. The review says it examined the recurring claims using statements from Mahamud, official CDC and WHO data, and a study on double infection. Its conclusion is specifically that simultaneous infection with two or more pathogens, including coronavirus and influenza, has been recorded; the excerpt does not provide case counts or identify particular patients.