Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Has this been
fact-checked?

Paste a claim or upload an image to find existing fact checks. See what fact-checkers found and read the evidence before you share.

Search fact checks ↓API & integrations ↗

Browse by topic

Explore fact checks by subject.

Latest fact checks

98,027 published reviews
अमर उजालाPolitics & government

भारत से तंग आकर ब्रिक्स देश भारत को बाहर निकालने और इंडोनेशिया को लाने की योजना बना रहे

Publisher’s rating: झूठ

The review says India was represented by Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla at the BRICS Parliamentary Forum in Brasília and reports that Indonesia was already part of BRICS. It found no report supporting the claim that India was to be removed from the BRICS summit.

日本ファクトチェックセンター(JFC)Health & medicine

シンガポールでワクチン接種拒否が犯罪に?

Publisher’s rating: 誤り

The review investigates a social-media claim that Singapore had newly made refusing vaccination a crime, with first-time offenders facing up to six months in prison and repeat offenders up to a year. The post also linked the supposed change to Bill Gates’s May 2025 visit. The review reports that the claim circulated in Japanese on May 13, 2025, by way of a repost of an English-language post that linked to a May 7 Slay News article. It concludes that the claim of a new law connected to Gates’s visit is false. (S1) To check the legal claim, the Japan Fact-Check Center says it examined Singapore’s official legislation site and the Infectious Diseases Act 1976. The review describes section 47 as allowing authorities to order vaccination or another preventive measure only when an outbreak is imminent in an area of Singapore and the measure is necessary or appropriate to protect public safety. It reports that penalties apply to violating such an order, but only under those limited circumstances—not as a general, newly introduced punishment for refusing vaccination. (S1) The review also cites Singapore’s Ministry of Health, which issued a statement on June 3, 2025, denying that Singapore had enacted any vaccination law following Gates’s recent visit. The distinction is central: the law already contained a conditional power to order vaccination, while the reviewed post suggested a new, broadly applicable criminalization tied to the visit. The review therefore finds the post misleading about both the law’s timing and its scope. (S1)

Where the data comes from

Fact checks come from Data Commons and link to the organizations that published them.

What you’ll find

Each result links to the original fact check. Open it to read the publisher’s findings, with summaries and supporting sources where available.

Report an error

To report an error, send the page URL and supporting evidence.