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.

13,677 published reviews in this topic

NewtralHealth & medicine

Una cerveza al día alarga la vida y rejuvenece

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim combines two purported benefits of a daily beer: longer life and rejuvenation. Newtral examined the studies and claims cited to support those ideas, including an article shared widely on Facebook that invoked research associated with the American Society of Human Genetics. The review says that the 2015 study it was directed to examined alcohol and tobacco use in relation to ageing; its reported association between moderate alcohol use and “healthy aging” did not establish that one beer a day produces that effect. The study itself cautioned against interpreting its findings as a simple cause-and-effect result, and one author pointed to other lifestyle factors, including socio-economic status. The review also contrasts those claims with large-scale alcohol research. It reports that a 2018 Lancet analysis covering 195 countries and territories attributed 2.8 million premature deaths to alcohol consumption in 2016 and found increased risks of several diseases even at low levels of consumption. A separate analysis of nearly 600,000 people in 83 studies found that mortality risk began to rise above 100 grams of alcohol per week; the review gives about 2.5 litres of 5% beer as the equivalent amount. These findings do not support the claim that a daily beer is a life-extending measure. Newtral explains why some studies that appear to show lower mortality among moderate drinkers can mislead: they may not account for socio-economic differences or for people who abstain because of illness or because they previously drank. The review also says that the cited ageing study did not specify “one beer a day,” and that its authors urged caution. Taken together, the evidence described does not establish that daily beer drinking prolongs life or rejuvenates; the claim turns limited associations into a specific health promise.

台灣事實查核中心Health & medicine

媒體報導「果汁喝太多 早死機率多3成」

Publisher’s rating: 錯誤

The claim concerns media reports that drinking too much fruit juice increases the chance of early death by 30%, reportedly from 9% to 42%. The review traced those reports to two studies published on May 17 in JAMA Network Open. It says the studies did not conclude that fruit juice is less healthy than soda or other sugar-sweetened beverages, contrary to the framing used by the reports. One of the cited papers was a literature review discussing whether fruit juice should be treated as a sugar-sweetened beverage; its conclusion, as summarized in the fact-check, was that juice consumption should be moderated and that further research was needed on health risks and potential benefits of specific juices. (S1: “兩篇報告都可以在美國醫學會期刊網路公開版（JAMA Network Open）找到。”; “這兩篇報告都可以在美國醫學會期刊網路公開版（JAMA Network Open）找到。”; “其結論為：” and “未有「純果汁比汽水等含糖飲料有更不健康」的結論，媒體的報導並不準確。”) The quantitative claim came from an observational study of 13,440 Black and White US adults aged 45 and older, followed for a mean of six years. The review reports that each additional daily 12-ounce serving of fruit juice was associated with a 24% higher all-cause mortality risk in that study population. A university professor consulted by the fact-check explained that the reported hazard ratio and confidence interval—1.24 and 1.09–1.42—were not a rise from 9% to 42%; the review says the 24% figure should be described as increased risk, not as an increase in the death rate or the chance of “early death.” (S1: “追蹤美國45歲以上的1萬3,440人，有黑人和白人等非拉丁族裔，追蹤六年時間”; “每天多攝取12盎司的果汁，全因死亡率風險相比增加24％”; “這並非從9％的風險提高到42％。”; “但不應該叫做「死亡率」增加。另外，all-cause mortality 是指所有原因之死亡風險，報導內容稱為「早逝機率」並不正確。”) The review also cautions against applying the result broadly: the study involved a particular US population, and the review says 85% of participants were at least 55. Its interviewees said the findings should not be generalized to younger people or directly applied to Taiwan, given differences in population and living and dietary habits. The evidence therefore supports a narrower association in the studied group, not the headline’s broad claim about early-death probabilities. (S1: “研究的人群是美國人，限於非拉丁族裔的黑人和白人”; “這項研究的實驗參加者有高達85%是55歲以上的年齡族群，研究結果只能適用這個年齡層，不能推論到青壯年或青少年。”; “這項研究對台灣人僅能做為參考，不能直接套用。”)