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.

13,674 published reviews in this topic

dpaHealth & medicine

Quand l’alimentation est mauvaise, les médicaments sont inefficaces. Quand l’alimentation est correcte, les médicaments sont inutiles.

Publisher’s rating: Cette affirmation est fausse, expliquent à la dpa un médecin et une nutritionniste. Bien que des aliments spécifiques puissent interagir avec certains médicaments, manger sainement ne rend pas ceux-ci inutiles, ou inefficaces en cas de mauvaise alimentation, concluent-ils.

The post makes a sweeping two-part claim: poor eating makes medicines ineffective, while a good diet makes medicines unnecessary. The dpa review consulted Jean-Paul Thissen, a professor of medicine at the Université catholique de Louvain, and Anne Ausloos, a member of the Belgian Society of Nutrition Physicians. Both rejected that general conclusion, while recognizing that diet can matter in particular circumstances. The review reports that Thissen called the claim’s conclusion plainly wrong and Ausloos described it as simplistic and dependent on the illness and circumstances. (S1: “Cette assertion est « totalement dénuée de sens », estime auprès de la dpa Jean-Paul Thissen, professeur ordinaire en médecine à l’Université catholique de Louvain.”; “Anne Ausloos, membre de la Société Belge des Médecins Nutritionnistes basée à Bruxelles, qualifie quant à elle l’affirmation de « fausse » et de « simpliste ». « Cela dépend des circonstances et des pathologies », déclare-t-elle à la dpa.”) The experts’ explanations distinguish possible dietary effects from the post’s blanket rule. Thissen gives grapefruit juice as an example of a food that can increase the action of some medicines. He also says a healthy diet may help prevent some diseases, potentially reducing the need for treatments in those cases; that does not mean diet replaces medicine. Ausloos similarly allows that healthy eating may lower risks or perhaps shorten treatment, but says it is not correct to conclude that people with a good diet never need medicines. (S1: “Jean-Paul Thissen donne notamment l'exemple du jus de pamplemousse, qui « peut augmenter l’action de certains médicaments ».”; “« Mais l’alimentation ne remplace pas le médicament », souligne-t-il.”; “Une alimentation saine « peut diminuer les risques » et peut-être mener à un « traitement moins long » mais « dire qu’on n’a jamais besoin de médicaments si notre alimentation est bonne n’est pas juste », affirme Anne Ausloos.”) Thus, the evidence supports a qualified point—some foods can affect some medicines and diet can influence health—not the claim that diet determines whether medicines work or are needed in general. The review’s cited expert comments address both halves of the claim, while preserving those specific qualifications. (S1: “Même s’il est vrai que l’alimentation peut dans une certaine mesure influencer l’action de certains médicaments et qu’une bonne alimentation peut prévenir certaines maladies et rendre ainsi certains médicaments superflus”, nuance-t-il.)

MediaWiseHealth & medicine

Eating a burnt orange with sugar will help you regain your lost senses from COVID-19

Publisher’s rating: Not Legit

The review examines a social-media remedy for people who lost taste or smell after COVID-19: burning an orange, mashing it with sugar, and eating it. It traces the suggestion to a YouTube creator who described it as a Jamaican home remedy, then reports how the review investigated the claim. The review says its keyword search found coverage by USA Today, the New York Times and the Miami Herald. [S1: “the creator said that burning an orange was a Jamaican home remedy for regaining senses”] [S1: “I used the words ‘jamaican roasting orange sugar remedy for lost senses.’”] The review’s account of the USA Today and Miami Herald reporting is that neither found scientific evidence that the mixture restores taste or smell. It relays experts’ qualification that the burnt orange might stimulate taste buds or shock the senses, but that is not the same as restoring lost senses. The review also notes that the New York Times’ Tejal Rao tried the trick after COVID-19 affected her sense of smell and did not find that it worked. [S1: “there just isn’t any scientific evidence that consuming this burnt orange and sugar concoction can restore someone’s senses.”] [S1: “She too tried the burnt orange trick after getting COVID-19 and losing her own sense of smell, but it didn’t magically work for her.”] A relevant qualification is that people who report success may have been recovering already: the review says the cited reporting offered that as a likely explanation, rather than evidence that the remedy caused recovery. It also relays the Miami Herald’s distinction between taste and smell, stating that the reported loss of taste was related to losing smell, not a direct effect on taste buds. The excerpt describes a search and a review of other reporting; it does not say the MediaWise reviewer personally tested the remedy. [S1: “people who say it worked for them were likely already recovering from their loss of smell by that point and hadn’t realized it.”] [S1: “the loss of taste is related to losing our sense of smell.”]

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaHealth & medicine

FACT CHECK: IDH රෝහලේ වෛද්‍ය ඇඳුම් හා උපකරණ හිඟයක්?

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a message presented as coming from Sri Lanka’s National Institute of Infectious Diseases (IDH). It said hospital staff were working at 60% capacity and listed surgical scrubs, washing machines, shoes and other items as needed. The review reports that this message had circulated previously and was being shared again. The list included “නිල් Surgical Scrub 100කොළ Surgical Scrub 150තැඹිලි Surgical Scrub 150” and “2×10kg ස්වයංක්‍රිය රෙදි සෝදන යන්ත්‍රයක්”. To check the claim, Fact Crescendo says it contacted IDH consultant physician Dr. Ananda Wijewickrama, whose name was associated with the message. According to the review, he said IDH had none of the needs listed and that the message was false. He also said people who believed it had been calling him to offer help, and that the renewed circulation had increased the calls and caused difficulties for him and his patients. The review therefore presents the hospital specialist’s direct response—not the circulated appeal—as its central evidence about whether IDH needed the requested items. The review also reports an update from the World Health Organization’s Sri Lanka office: it said there were adequate personal protective equipment supplies for health workers in Sri Lanka, and that any relative shortage amid the pandemic would be addressed by the Ministry of Health through procurement and other means. It further said no public request had been made for medical supplies and that rumors claiming otherwise were false. This broader statement concerns health-worker supplies nationally; the review’s specific finding about the listed IDH items rests on Wijewickrama’s response.