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.

13,673 published reviews in this topic

Fact Crescendo CambodiaHealth & medicine

ស្ថានភាព​នៅ​ថៃ មិន​ទាន់​ហួស​ពេល​ទេ​ខ្មែរ​យើង​ទ្រាំ​នៅ​ផ្ទះ​សិន​ទៅ បើ​គ្មាន​ការ​ចាំ​បាច់ មើល​ថៃ​ជា​គំរូ​ទៅ ឆ្លង ១​ថ្ងៃ​ជិត ២០០០០​នាក់ ស្លាប់​មួយ​ថ្ងៃ ២០០​នាក់ សោក​នាដកម្ម ការពារ​ខ្លួន​អ្នក​ស្មើ​នឹង​ការពារ​ក្រុម​គ្រួសារ​អ្នក សូម​កុំ​ជួប​ជុំ​គ្នា​ផឹក​ស៊ី​អី ប្រយ័ត្ន​ស្ដាយ​ក្រោយ ស៊ែរ​តៗ​គ្នា​ផង រូបភាព​ថ្មី​ពី​ថៃ

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaHealth & medicine

FACT CHECK: පැය 24 පුරා කොවිඩ් එන්නත්කරණය සිදු කරන ලෝකයේ එකම රට ශ්‍රී ලංකාව ද?

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

The claim was that Sri Lanka was the only country in the world providing COVID-19 vaccinations 24 hours a day. The review places it in the context of Sri Lanka’s newly opened round-the-clock vaccination centres and examines a social-media post making that exclusivity claim. It reports that the Army opened Sri Lanka’s first such centre at Viharamahadevi Park in Colombo on August 1. The review says 19,075 people were vaccinated there between 6:30 a.m. that day and 5:00 a.m. the following day. To test whether Sri Lanka was unique, the review describes examining reports of round-the-clock vaccination elsewhere. It cites examples in New York City, the United Kingdom, Taguig in the Philippines, Delhi and Mumbai in India, Spain, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan’s Sindh province. The excerpt specifies that New York’s centre was a three-day pilot, and that the Taguig programme was limited to selected districts. It also says some other centres served selected groups, while reporting that some programmes were open to the general public. The evidence directly contradicts the claim of global uniqueness: the review identifies multiple countries with round-the-clock COVID-19 vaccination activity, including examples predating Sri Lanka’s August 1 opening. Its conclusion distinguishes those varied arrangements—such as pilots or limited-access centres—from programmes open to the public. The excerpt does not establish that every cited programme had the same scope or duration as Sri Lanka’s; it argues that Sri Lanka was neither the only nor the first country to have such centres.

FactcrescendoHealth & medicine

ভুয়ো ভ্যাকসিনে মৃত্যু হলে কেন্দ্রকে দোষারোপ করা হত, মন্তব্য করেছেন দেবাঞ্জন দেব

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a viral newspaper screenshot attributed to Debanjan Deb, which appeared to say that he had made a “sensational confession” that the Centre would be blamed if people died from fake vaccines. Factcrescendo reports that the screenshot was not an authentic account of his statement: it had been edited to attach Debanjan’s name to a headline about a different event. The review describes its conclusion as that the claim was false and baseless. (S1: “পোস্টের ক্যাপশনে লেখা রয়েছে ‘আপনারা একটু পেপারটি দেখুন তৃনমূল কংগ্রেসের রাজনৈতিক কুটনৈতিক চালবাজি’”; “নিষ্কর্ষঃ তথ্য যাচাই করে ফ্যাক্ট ক্রিসেন্ডো সিদ্ধান্তে এসেছে উপরোক্ত দাবিটি ভুল ও ভিত্তিহীন।”) The review says it searched Google for relevant keywords and found the 26 June 2021 e-paper of the Bengali newspaper Ekdin. Its actual front-page headline said that the Centre would have been blamed if deaths occurred from fake vaccines, then identified the occasion as Suvendu Adhikari expressing concern during a Health Department protest. The viral version replaced that event reference with wording claiming a confession by Debanjan. (S1: “সংবাদপত্র একদিন-এর ২৬ জুন-এর ই-পেপার সংস্করণে এই প্রতিবেদনেটি দেখতে পাই।” ; “প্রথম পাতার এই এই খবরের শিরোনামে লেখা রয়েছে, ‘ভুয়ো ভ্যাকসিনে মৃত্যু হলে কেন্দ্রকে দোষারোপ করা হত স্বাস্থ্যভবন অভিযানে গিয়ে উদ্বেগ শুভেন্দুর’।” ; “ভাইরাল স্ক্রিনশটকে সম্পাদিত করে ‘স্বাস্থ্যভবন অভিযানে গিয়ে উদ্বেগ শুভেন্দুর’ যায়গায় ‘চাঞ্চল্যকর স্বীকারোক্তি দেবাঞ্জনের’।”) Thus, the underlying newspaper headline supports a report about Suvendu Adhikari’s concern during the protest, not a confession by Debanjan Deb. The review also says it found the viral image through a Facebook keyword search and observed that its headline had been changed; it does not provide further detail about who altered or circulated the image. (S1: “ফেসবুকে প্রাসঙ্গিক কিওয়ার্ড এর সার্চ এর মাধ্যমে পোস্ট করা এই ছবিটি দেখতে পাই কিন্তু শিরোনামে পরিবর্তন দেখা যায়।” ; “ভাইরাল স্ক্রিনশটকে সম্পাদিত করে ‘স্বাস্থ্যভবন অভিযানে গিয়ে উদ্বেগ শুভেন্দুর’ যায়গায় ‘চাঞ্চল্যকর স্বীকারোক্তি দেবাঞ্জনের’।” )

dpaHealth & medicine

L'utilisation de l’ivermectine contre le Covid-19 a été empêchée car les accords conclus avec Pfizer ne permettent pas aux États d’échapper à leur contrat, qui stipule que celui-ci ne peut pas être annulé même si un médicament efficace est trouvé pour traiter le Covid-19.

Publisher’s rating: Ces allégations se basent sur une ébauche de contrat entre Pfizer et le gouvernement albanais, et non le contrat finalisé. Par ailleurs, ce document ne permet pas de prouver que l’utilisation de l’ivermectine a été bloquée comme traitement du Covid-19. Il n’a pas non plus été scientifiquement démontré que l’ivermectine est efficace contre le Covid-19.

The claim relies on a document presented as a Pfizer contract with Albania, arguing that a clause would prevent cancellation even if an effective Covid-19 treatment were found, thereby blocking ivermectin. The review says the document was a draft, not the finalized contract, and notes that the article making the claim itself acknowledged this. The draft’s authenticity was also difficult to verify because it had not been published through an official source. The cited passage does not establish that ivermectin was blocked. The review reports that ivermectin is not mentioned anywhere in the document. Instead, the passage says that approval of another vaccine or medicine before Pfizer’s product would not change the situation described in the draft. That situation was dated 6 January 2021, when Albania had not yet begun its vaccination campaign. The review also points to a separate section: the draft’s termination conditions appear on page 24, not in the passage used to support the claim. The review further cautions that describing ivermectin as an effective Covid-19 medicine was not supported by conclusive evidence at the time. It reports that the European Medicines Agency and the World Health Organization advised against using it outside clinical trials while further data were awaited. Overall, the document cited does not demonstrate that ivermectin use was prevented, and the claim’s premise about its effectiveness was not established.

dpaHealth & medicine

Betaalde campagne op Twitter om angst voor deltavariant aan te wakkeren.

Publisher’s rating: De oorspronkelijke tweet werd geplaatst door een Amerikaanse IC-arts, die berichtte over de situatie in zijn ziekenhuis. De tweet is toen gekopieerd door antivaxers om te doen overkomen alsof het hier om een pro-vaccinatie campagne gaat.

The claim arose from a Facebook image showing multiple accounts posting identical messages about concern over the Delta variant and unvaccinated people arriving in intensive care. The review traces the original message to American doctor Sam Ghali, who posted it on 22 July 2021 after leaving the ICU. Ghali said he was worried about the variant and that 99% of the patients coming to him were unvaccinated. The review notes that his hospital could not verify that precise percentage, but said at least a majority of its patients were unvaccinated. [S1] The review examined who copied the message and what they said about doing so. It reports that the first account visible in the Facebook image, @realjuliasong, had publicly expressed anti-vaccine views and later said she copied the message to discredit its original author. Other accounts named in the image had also expressed opposition to vaccination; one account later described its copied tweet as a joke and said it regretted posting it. The review also reports that two accounts had been suspended, while archived posts showed they were not vaccine supporters. [S1] The article therefore concludes that the repeated posts do not establish a paid campaign to frighten people about variants. Its account of the posts instead points to anti-vaccine users copying Ghali’s message, including to undermine him, and to a joke about a fictitious “Ligma Variant.” The review says the account behind that joke also posted about other nonexistent variants and acknowledged fooling people. [S1]

FACTLYHealth & medicine

US President Joe Biden recently issued orders to send unvaccinated Americans to quarantine camps

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerned a social-media post saying that President Joe Biden had ordered unvaccinated Americans to be sent to quarantine camps, allegedly detaining citizens indefinitely if they were not vaccinated before 2022. FACTLY traced the article behind the post to a financial satire website, rather than to an announcement of government policy. The review says it searched for an order and found none on the White House website; it also reports finding no relevant tweet from Biden’s office. It distinguishes the actual policy announcement on July 29, 2021: federal employees were required to report their vaccination status or face measures including masking, weekly testing and physical distancing. The review says those requirements applied to federal workers, not to Americans generally, and did not include sending people to quarantine camps. The article circulated as evidence of the alleged camps was republished by Value Walk on June 21, 2021. According to FACTLY, a disclaimer at the bottom identified it as satire and said it had first appeared on The Stone Market, which the review describes as a financial satire website. Thus, the post presented a satirical article as though it reported a real order, while the cited federal-worker rules were a separate, limited policy.

dpaHealth & medicine

Les États-Unis invalident les tests PCR.

Publisher’s rating: C’est faux. La FDA, l'administration américaine des denrées alimentaires et des médicaments, n’a pas décidé de révoquer son approbation à l’utilisation des tests PCR dans leur ensemble pour détecter le Covid-19. Ce qu’il s’est passé, c’est que les Centres américains pour le contrôle et la prévention des maladies (CDC) ont indiqué qu'ils allaient retirer leur demande d’autorisation pour un type de test PCR spécifique afin de privilégier des modèles à détection multiple.

dpaHealth & medicine

Hunderttausende Fälle von Nebenwirkungen und tausende Todesfälle durch Impfungen in Europa gemeldet.

Publisher’s rating: Obwohl die Anzahl der Meldungen für einen bestimmten Zeitpunkt stimmen mag, sagen diese nichts aus über Nebenwirkungen und Todesfälle. Ein direkter Zusammenhang mit der Impfung ist nicht belegt, es handelt sich um Verdachtsmeldungen. Zudem ist die Infektionssterblichkeitsrate ein weltweiter Schätzwert - sie definiert keine Pandemie.

The claim combines two assertions: that Europe had more than 562,000 reported vaccine side effects and more than 9,000 deaths, and that an infection fatality rate (IFR) of 0.15% relates to calling COVID-19 the century’s deadliest pandemic. The review says the numbers likely came from the European Medicines Agency’s EudraVigilance system and that similar figures had circulated online in mid-June 2021. It describes the entries as reports of symptoms observed in temporal connection with vaccination, not confirmed effects caused by a vaccine. The review does not independently establish the reported totals; it explains what such reports can and cannot show. The review cites the EMA’s guidance that database entries are suspected adverse-reaction cases, not confirmation that a medicine caused an effect in a patient. It therefore says deaths in the reports cannot automatically be attributed to COVID-19 vaccination, and applies the same caution to other reported effects. It notes that further data and scientific investigation are needed to assess causation. It also reports that Swissmedic said at the end of July 2021 that the benefits of the vaccines in use outweighed their risks. On the IFR assertion, the review explains that the 0.15% figure likely came from a study estimating a global average using available data as of February 21, 2021. It highlights the study author’s caution that the evidence base was uncertain and the rate varied by country and continent. The review distinguishes that estimated mortality measure from the definition of a pandemic: it says the WHO definition concerns worldwide spread of a new pathogen against which most people are not immune, so the IFR does not itself define a pandemic.

dpaHealth & medicine

Modernas mRNA-Impfstoff war schon vor dem Auftreten des Coronavirus Sars-CoV-2 entwickelt.

Publisher’s rating: Der Kontext der Dokumente ist falsch. Moderna und NIAID haben tatsächlich Vereinbarungen zur Entwicklung von Impfstoffen gegen Coronaviren getroffen. Dabei ging es jedoch um das Mers-Coronavirus und nicht um Sars-CoV-2, das die Lungenkrankheit Covid-19 auslöst.

The claim arose from a Facebook post asserting that Moderna’s mRNA vaccine had already been developed in December 2019. The post relied on documents describing an agreement between Moderna and the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which the review says concerned vaccine research before the pandemic. The review distinguishes evidence of an earlier coronavirus-vaccine collaboration from evidence that the specific SARS-CoV-2 vaccine had already been developed: the document it examined identifies the agreement as concerning MERS, not SARS-CoV-2. The review reports that the cited Moderna–NIAID document names an mRNA vaccine against MERS on page 83. It also says that a university in North Carolina involved in the research confirmed the MERS context to AFP, and that NIAID confirmed it to Lead Stories fact-checkers. These details address what the agreement was for; they do not support treating it as a plan for a vaccine against the later-identified SARS-CoV-2 virus. As further chronology, the review says the agreement was signed before SARS-CoV-2 was sequenced and that WHO received the virus’s genetic sequences from Chinese authorities on January 11, 2020. It describes an Axios report published June 25, 2020, as discussing possible NIH intellectual-property interests in Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine while noting that the earlier agreement was not directed at SARS-CoV-2. The review’s evidence therefore supports a pre-existing research relationship on coronaviruses, but not the claim that Moderna’s SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was developed before that virus emerged.