PeakMetrics / Fact Checks
Health & medicine fact checks
Explore claims publishers have checked about health & medicine. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.
Search fact checks
Search by text or image13,674 published reviews in this topic
Chinavirus: estudo da USP comprova cientificamente a Hidroxicloroquina, Azitromicina…
Publisher’s rating: Falso
ਈ-ਕਾਮਰਸ ਵੈਬਸਾਈਟ ਚੈਂਪ ਫਿੱਟ ਦਾ ਕਹਿਣਾ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਭਾਫ ਲੈਣ ਨਾਲ ਕੋਰੋਨਾਈਵਰਸ ਨੂੰ ਮਾਰ ਸਕਦੇ ਹਾ।
Publisher’s rating: Mostly False
Homem diz em vídeo que após ser vacinado nos Estados Unidos, recebeu ivermectina e leite condensado
Publisher’s rating: FALSO: Vídeo que circula pelas redes sociais foi gravado em Miami Beach, mas a prefeitura da cidade norte-americana informou que não existe distribuição desses itens. Além disso, protocolos oficiais nos EUA não incluem o medicamento como tratamento contra a covid-19.
Covid-19 has never been isolated or photographed and so does not exist
Publisher’s rating: False
مجله لنست گزارش خود را درباره واکسن روسی کرونا (اسپوتنیک) پس گرفت.
Publisher’s rating: شاخدار
Da Fälle der hochansteckenden Coronavirus-Mutation N501Y im Schulhaus Maihof in der Stadt Luzern nachgewiesen wurden, fand dort am 29. Januar 2021 einen Massentest statt. Es handelt sich um den ersten Massentest an einer Schule im Kanton Luzern. Auf Facebook wird das Vorgehen bei der Testung kritisiert. In einem Facebook-Post (hier archiviert) wird behauptet, Lehrpersonen hätten die Kinder nicht begleiten dürfen und viele Kinder hätten anschliessend Kopfschmerzen gehabt. Des Weiteren wird behauptet, die Eltern seien via Brief über die Massentestung informiert worden und die Kinder hätten an den Test anschliessend von der Familie getrennt ausharren müssen.
Publisher’s rating: Einige Behauptungen sind falsch oder irreführend. So wurden die Eltern via Mail über die begleiten Massentestung der Kinder informiert und die Kinder wurden von den Lehrpersonen betreut. Der Schule sind keine Klagen über Kopfschmerzen bekannt. Die Isolations-Regelung richtet sich nach den allgemeinen Bestimmungen der Behörden.
"Geweldig nieuws in Canada. Rocco Galati heeft de zaak gewonnen tegen gedwongen immunisatie in Canada. Het is nu een federale wet." Een afbeelding met deze tekst wordt in Nederland en België gedeeld op Facebook. De tekst gaat verder: “Wie probeert om bij iemand anders vaccinatie af te dwingen, kan worden vervolgd op grond van de Neurenberg code.”
Publisher’s rating: De gedeelde tekst is onjuist. Er is in Canada geen federale wet aangenomen die zorgt voor een verbod op verplichte vaccinatie, nadat advocaat Galati een vermeende rechtszaak ‘won’.
The Facebook image claimed that Canadian lawyer Rocco Galati had won a case against compulsory immunization, making a federal ban on mandatory vaccination law. It also warned that people who tried to make someone get vaccinated could be prosecuted under the Nuremberg Code. The review examined those specific claims, rather than a different vaccine dispute: it says the image referred to Galati’s Twitter account and describes a court proceeding he brought with Vaccine Choice Canada. The review reports that the proceeding began in mid-2020 in Ontario’s Superior Court and challenged Covid-19 measures. It says there was no judgment in the case at the time of the review and that the case was not about mandatory vaccination. The reviewer also checked Galati’s Twitter account and found no sign there of the alleged victory. Together, the reported status and subject of the proceeding do not support the image’s claim that Galati won a case establishing a federal ban. The article distinguishes this from limited provincial school-entry requirements: it says Ontario and New Brunswick required proof of vaccination against certain diseases for children to attend school, but not Covid-19. It further reports that Canada’s health minister said a federal Covid-19 vaccine mandate would not be introduced, while provincial leaders had said vaccination would not be mandatory in their areas. The review therefore describes the image’s broader account of a Canadian compulsory-vaccination law as unsupported by the facts it checked.
«L’Italia è prima in Europa per numero di persone vaccinate»
Publisher’s rating: C'eri quasi
Francesco Boccia said Italy was first in Europe by number of people vaccinated. The review explains that this comparison depends on what “vaccinated” means: total doses administered, people who had received at least one dose, or people who had completed the two-dose course. It compares figures from Our World in Data, which it describes as the most reliable tool for cross-country statistical comparisons despite possible reporting delays. The figures examined are for 8 February 2021. On total doses administered, Italy had given about 2.63 million, second in the EU behind Germany’s 3.28 million. For people with at least one dose, Italy’s 1.45 million placed it third in the EU, behind Germany and France. If “Europe” includes the United Kingdom, the review says the UK led both of those comparisons. Italy was first in Europe only for people who had received both doses: about 1.18 million, ahead of Germany, Spain, and the UK. But measuring completed vaccinations as a share of population put Italy fourth, not first. The review therefore finds that Boccia’s unqualified claim overstates Italy’s position. It was accurate only for the absolute number of people who had received both doses; it did not describe Italy’s standing for total doses or for people with at least one dose. The article also notes that countries used different vaccination strategies, which affects how a simple ranking should be interpreted.
ਵਿਸ਼ਵ ਸਿਹਤ ਸੰਗਠਨ (WHO) ਨੇ ਸੁਝਾਅ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਕਿ ਸੌਣ ਵੇਲੇ ਜੁਰਾਬਾਂ ਪਾਉਣਾ ਸਿਹਤ ਲਈ ਨੁਕਸਾਨਦੇਹ ਹੋ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ
Publisher’s rating: False
In een video doet een man "vol verbazing" zijn beklag over de coronamaatregelen in Nederland (hier gearchiveerd). Volgens de man zou minister van Volksgezondheid Hugo de Jonge mensen die zich niet aan de regels houden willen opsluiten. Ook zouden er al 250 mensen overleden zijn op 100.000 prikken. "Dat houdt in dat als je heel Nederland vaccineert, er meer mensen sterven aan het vaccin dan aan corona zelf." Ten slotte zullen alle kinderen wekelijks getest worden, maar spreekt de man wel de waarheid?
Publisher’s rating: De beweringen van de man kloppen niet. Er zijn tot nog toe 15 meldingen van overlijden na vaccinatie in Nederland. Daarbij gaat het allemaal om ouderen met ernstige onderliggende gezondheidsproblemen. Ook klopt het niet helemaal dat de Jonge mensen wil opsluiten die zich niet aan de regels willen houden, noch dat kinderen voortaan wekelijks getest moeten worden. Het bericht is daarom onwaar.
¿El covid-19 es más mortal en hombres que en mujeres?
Publisher’s rating: Verdad
Im Zusammenhang mit Impfungen gegen Covid-19 kursieren eine Menge Gerüchte und Verschwörungsmythen. In einem Facebook-Post (archivierte Version) wird beispielsweise behauptet, dass die Johns-Hopkins-Universität bestätigt habe, sogenannte Impfverweigerer mittels PCR-Test impfen zu können. Laut Post sollen «winzige, sternförmige Mikrogeräte» entwickelt worden seien, «die sich an der Darmschleimhaut festsetzen und Medikamente in den Körper abgeben». Im verlinkten Artikel wird wiederum auf eine Veröffentlichung der Johns-Hopkins-Universität verwiesen, die die Behauptung unterstützen soll.
Publisher’s rating: Die Behauptung ist falsch. Die im Artikel verlinkte Veröffentlichung behandelt ein anderes Thema, Verweise auf eine Impfung gegen Covid-19 sucht man dort vergebens. Laut Paul-Ehrlich-Institut ist eine Impfung per PCR-Test nicht möglich. Auf dem Markt sind ausschließlich Covid-19-Impfstoffe, die per Spritze verabreicht werden.
The Facebook post alleged that Johns Hopkins University had confirmed that people refusing vaccination could be vaccinated through a PCR test, using tiny star-shaped devices that attach to the intestinal lining and release medication. The article linked in the post pointed to a Johns Hopkins publication about “Theragrippers,” but the review says that publication concerned a different subject and contained no references to Covid-19 vaccination. The review describes the university research as testing whether animals given pain medication through Theragrippers had a higher concentration of the drug in their bloodstream than a control group. That is evidence about medication delivery and measured drug concentration—not evidence that the devices deliver a Covid-19 vaccine or that a PCR test can administer one. A Paul-Ehrlich-Institut spokesperson also characterized the scientific publication as having been misused to create a conspiracy theory. As further checks, the review reports that the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut said vaccination by PCR test was not possible, and that the Covid-19 vaccines then available were administered by injection. It specifies that, as of 8 February 2021, three vaccines were authorized in Germany and the EU: Comirnaty from BioNTech and Pfizer, Moderna, and AstraZeneca. The review therefore distinguishes the actual Theragripper research from the post’s unsupported claim about PCR-based Covid-19 vaccination.
Op sociale media gaat een screenshot rond met de tekst uit een facebookreactie. In de afbeelding wordt gesproken over een pleistervaccin van producent Moderna, dat aan schoolgaande kinderen gegeven zou gaan worden. Ook zouden de kinderen op school heel veel getest gaan worden. De schrijver van de tekst zegt te hebben gehoord dat er een aanpassing is gedaan in de spoedwet. Volgens de schrijver betekent dit "dat zodra kinderen op school willen zijn, ze deze pleister mogen / gaan oppakken". Ook zouden kinderen uiteindelijk in coronakampen geplaatst kunnen worden, als de ouders niet meewerken aan de vaccinatie.
Publisher’s rating: De uitspraken zijn niet juist. Er wordt op het moment wel door verschillende universiteiten onderzoek gedaan naar een Covid-19 vaccin in de vorm van een pleister. Deze studies zijn nog in een vroeg stadium en de pleisters zullen dus voorlopig zeker niet op schoolkinderen gebruikt worden. Daarnaast mag een kind niet getest of gevaccineerd worden zonder de toestemming van de ouders. Ook onder de spoedwet niet. Tenslotte is er geen enkel bewijs dat kinderen in een coronakamp terechtkomen als ouders niet meewerken aan de vaccinatie.
The review examined a social-media screenshot claiming that schoolchildren would receive a Moderna vaccine through a patch, be tested frequently at school, and potentially be sent to “corona camps” if their parents refused vaccination. It also addressed the screenshot writer’s assertion that an emergency-law change would make the patch compulsory for children attending school. The review’s account identifies the specific claims as allegations from the shared image, rather than as an announced school policy. [S1: “Volgens de tekst in de afbeelding zouden kinderen op school gevaccineerd worden met een pleistervaccin van Moderna.”] The review reports that research into vaccine patches was underway at Swansea, Connecticut, and Pittsburgh universities, but says all three projects were still pre-clinical in early February 2021—not testing on people. It adds that the technique was not approved or available to the public, and that vaccines approved in the European Union at the time were administered by injection. Thus, the existence of patch research did not establish that children would receive patches at school. [S1: “Begin februari 2021 zijn er zeker drie projecten lopende: aan de universiteiten van Swansea, Connecticut en Pittsburgh. Maar: ze bevinden zich allemaal nog in een pre-klinische fase. Met andere woorden, er wordt nog niet getest op mensen.”] On consent, the review says children under 12 could not undergo a medical procedure such as vaccination without parental consent; for children aged 12 and older, it says both parent and child must consent. It also reports that testing primary-school children required parental consent. The review examined the emergency law and the bodily-integrity provision in Article 11 of the Dutch Constitution, concluding that neither the emergency-law changes nor the related Public Health Act changes authorized vaccination against a person’s will or vaccination of children without parental permission. It found no evidence for the alleged threat of corona camps and said parents retained the choice not to vaccinate their child. [S1: “In de coronaspoedwet staat nu geen uitzondering op de onaantastbaarheid van het lichaam. Ook de wijzigingen in de Wet publieke gezondheid, die met de spoedwet gepaard gaan, zorgen er niet voor dat de overheid mensen tegen hun wil in mag vaccineren.”] [S1: “Ouders hebben nog steeds zelf de keuze of ze hun kind laten vaccineren, en dus ook het recht om dit niet te doen.”]
¿En República Dominicana la gente no esté muriendo por covid-19?
Publisher’s rating: Falso
The claim concerned whether anyone in the Dominican Republic was dying of COVID-19. The review checked reported deaths in that country, comparing figures from its Ministry of Public Health, the World Health Organization (WHO), and the Johns Hopkins University database. It notes that reporting dates could produce differences between the sources, but says their figures were broadly similar: “Hay días en los que puede haber diferencias en los datos de esas fuentes porque las fechas de actualización varían, pero todas se acercan.” The review reports that the first COVID-19 death in the country was recorded on March 16, 2020. By February 6, 2021, it says, official figures counted 2,831 deaths. It also reports that Johns Hopkins had the same total on February 8, while a WHO weekly update based on data through January 31 counted 2,646; the WHO’s country-status page, last updated February 8, also showed 2,831. These dated figures directly contradict the claim that no one in the country was dying of the disease. The article acknowledges that the country reported no COVID-19 deaths on two days in 2020: March 25 and May 17. It distinguishes those isolated reports from the overall record, noting that deaths were reported from March 2020 onward and that the Dominican Republic was not among the 19 countries and territories the WHO bulletin identified as having recorded no COVID-19 deaths. The review concludes that the claim was inconsistent with the country’s reported death records.
