Latest news with #AnthonyFauci
Scroll.in
26-05-2025
- Health
- Scroll.in
Sensational claims with a grain of truth: Why it is easy to fall for health misinformation
In today's digital world, people routinely turn to the internet for health or medical information. In addition to actively searching online, they often come across health-related information on social media or receive it through emails or messages from family or friends. It can be tempting to share such messages with loved ones – often with the best of intentions. As a global health communication scholar studying the effects of media on health and development, I explore artistic and creative ways to make health information more engaging and accessible, empowering people to make informed decisions. Although there is a fire hose of health-related content online, not all of it is factual. In fact, much of it is inaccurate or misleading, raising a serious health communication problem: Fake health information – whether shared unknowingly and innocently, or deliberately to mislead or cause harm – can be far more captivating than accurate information. This makes it difficult for people to know which sources to trust and which content is worthy of sharing. Allure of fake health information Fake health information can take many forms. For example, it may be misleading content that distorts facts to frame an issue or individual in a certain context. Or it may be based on false connections, where headlines, visuals or captions don't align with the content. Despite this variation, such content often shares a few common characteristics that make it seem believable and more shareable than facts. For one thing, fake health information often appears to be true because it mixes a grain of truth with misleading claims. For example, early in the Covid-19 pandemic, false rumors suggested that drinking ethanol or bleach could protect people from the virus. While ethanol or bleach can indeed kill viruses on surfaces such as countertops, it is extremely dangerous when it comes into contact with skin or gets inside the body. Another marker of fake health information is that it presents ideas that are simply too good to be true. There is something appealingly counterintuitive in certain types of fake health information that can make people feel they have access to valuable or exclusive knowledge that others may not know. For example, a claim such as ' chocolate helps you lose weight ' can be especially appealing because it offers a sense of permission to indulge and taps into a simple, feel-good solution to a complex problem. Such information often spreads faster because it sounds both surprising and hopeful, validating what some people want to believe. Sensationalism also drives the spread of fake health information. For instance, when critics falsely claimed that Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the chief medical adviser to the president at the time, was responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic, it generated a lot of public attention. In a study on vaccine hesitancy published in 2020, my colleagues and I found that controversial headlines in news reports that go viral before national vaccination campaigns can discourage parents from getting their children vaccinated. These headlines seem to reveal sensational and secret information that can falsely boost the message's credibility. The pull to share The internet has created fertile ground for spreading fake health information. Professional-looking websites and social media posts with misleading headlines can lure people into clicking or quickly sharing, which drives more and more readers to the falsehood. People tend to share information they believe is relevant to them or their social circles. In 2019, an article with the false headline ' Ginger is 10,000x more effective at killing cancer than chemo ' was shared more than 800,000 times on Facebook. The article contained several factors that make people feel an urgency to react and share without checking the facts: compelling visuals, emotional stories, misleading graphs, quotes from experts with omitted context and outdated content that is recirculated. Visual cues like the logos of reputable organisations or photos of people wearing white medical coats add credibility to these posts. This kind of content is highly shareable, often reaching far more people than scientifically accurate studies that may lack eye-catching headlines or visuals, easy-to-understand words or dramatic storylines. But sharing content without verifying it first has real-world consequences. For example, studies have found that Covid-19-related fake information reduces people's trust in the government and in health care systems, making people less likely to use or seek out health services. Unfounded claims about vaccine side effects have led to reduced vaccination rates globally, fueling the return of dangerous diseases, including measles. , such as false claims about cinnamon being a treatment for cancer, has caused hospitalisations and even deaths. The spread of health misinformation has reduced cooperation with important prevention and treatment recommendations, prompting a growing need for medical professionals to receive proper training and develop skills to effectively debunk fake health information. Play How to combat it In today's era of information overload in which anyone can create and share content, being able to distinguish between credible and misleading health information before sharing is more important than ever. Researchers and public health organisations have outlined several strategies to help people make better-informed decisions. Whether health care consumers come across health information on social media, in an email or through a messaging app, here are three reliable ways to verify its accuracy and credibility before sharing: Use a search engine to cross-check health claims. Never rely on a single source. Instead, enter the health claim into a reputable search engine like Google and see what trusted sources have to say. Prioritise information from established organisations like the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United Nations Children's Fund or peer-reviewed journals like The Lancet or Journal of the American Medical Association. If multiple reputable sources agree, the information is more likely to be reliable. Reliable fact-checking websites such as and Snopes can also help root out fake information. Evaluate the source's credibility. A quick way to assess a website's trustworthiness is to check its 'About Us' page. This section usually explains who is behind the content, their mission and their credentials. Also, search the name of the author. Do they have recognised expertise or affiliations with credible institutions? Reliable websites often have domains ending in .gov or .edu, indicating government or educational institutions. Finally, check the publication date. Information on the internet keeps circulating for years and may not be the most accurate or relevant in the present context. If you're still unsure, don't share. If you're still uncertain about the accuracy of a claim, it's better to keep it to yourself. Forwarding unverified information can unintentionally contribute to the spread of misinformation and potentially cause harm, especially when it comes to health. Questioning dubious claims and sharing only verified information not only protects against unsafe behaviors and panic, but it also helps curb the spread of fake health information. At a time when misinformation can spread faster than a virus, taking a moment to pause and fact-check can make a big difference.
South China Morning Post
25-05-2025
- Health
- South China Morning Post
Covid cases reaching a peak in China and will start falling next month: leading expert
Covid-19 infections in China are reaching a peak and will start to decline next month, the country's best known respiratory diseases specialist has said, as the authorities urged the public to take precautions. Zhong Nanshan told the opening of the Guangzhou Science and Technology and Activity Week on Saturday that people with symptoms – particularly the elderly – should seek medical treatment within 48 hours. He said that in the current cycle, the virus was more infectious and the symptoms were similar to general influenza but with a more obvious sore throat, according to Shanghai-based news site 'This round of coronavirus infections is at its peak and is predicted to decline in June,' said Zhong, who is often described as China's Anthony Fauci. 'From March to May, the number of people infected with the coronavirus has risen, according to data from Hong Kong, Singapore, Britain, France, Brazil and Norway.' Citing data from the Chinese Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), he said that between March 31 and May 4, tests on outpatients with flu symptoms and hospital patients with severe symptoms had seen an increase in the number of positives from 7.5 per cent to 16.2 per cent. However, the overall number of acute respiratory infectious diseases remained at a low level, according to the CDC report released on May 8, but there was an upward trend in the number of positives in April. Test results showed that all detected pathogens were known common ones and no unknown pathogens or newly emerging infectious diseases had been found.
Fox News
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
Trump signs executive orders bolstering nuclear industry, domestic uranium mining
President Donald Trump signed several executive orders (EOs) on nuclear energy proliferation and an order removing political considerations from public-sector science, as conservatives claimed the latter was scandalized in its response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Trump also signed restoring "gold standard science" as the cornerstone of federal research. A senior White House official said on Friday there has been a decline in "disruptive research" and investments in biomedical research, along with "serious cases" of fraud and misconduct and the inability to reproduce scientific methods for the purpose of restoring public trust. The official also blamed policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and "woke DEI initiatives" for endangering the public's trust in government scientists. Now-retired NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci was repeatedly denounced for flip-flopping and obfuscating during his time engineering the federal response to COVID-19, leading many particularly on the right to disregard and dismiss the legitimacy of federal health authorities outright. That order cites the fact the Biden administration included political edits from teachers unions in school-reopening guidance, instead of leading with any scientific evidence. The order will enforce "gold standard science," defined as reproducible, transparent and falsifiable – as well as being subject to peer review and making sure that scientists are not discouraged from discovering outcomes that run counter to a narrative. In terms of nuclear energy, one order will reform nuclear R&D at the Energy Department, accelerate reactor testing at national labs and establish a pilot program for new construction. Energy Secretary Chris Wright previously told Fox News Digital that revitalizing and highlighting the work of U.S. national labs is paramount to his agenda. In a move that appears to support Wright's push for nuclear power, Trump will sign an order aimed at advancing new reactor construction on public lands. A senior White House official cited the importance of that type of reliable power-source for critical defense facilities and AI data centers. Another order being signed Friday will overhaul the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to require it to rule on reactor license applications within 18 months. Only two new nuclear reactors have begun construction and entered into commercial operation since the Carter administration. A typically risk-averse culture that requires, for example, nuclear facilities to emit as little radiation as possible, including below naturally-occurring levels, which critics said has hindered the NRC from licensing new reactors as technology begets safer and cheaper means of production. The orders will also seek to raise nuclear energy capacity from 100 gigawatts (GW) to 400 GW within 25 years. Another order will establish a vision to mine and enrich uranium within the U.S., decreasing another avenue of foreign reliance – and "reinvigorate" the nuclear fuel cycle. "That means America will start mining and enriching uranium and expanding domestic uranium conversion and enrichment capacity," a senior White House official said. Trump is expected to leverage the Defense Production Act – which last helped secure COVID-19 paraphernalia like masks and ventilators – to seek agreements with domestic nuclear energy companies for the procurement of enriched uranium, as well as finding ways to manage spent nuke fuel. Nuclear energy, the White House said in the order, is "is necessary to power the next generation technologies that secure our global industrial, digital, and economic dominance, achieve energy independence, and protect our national security."
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Why we fall for fake health information – and how it spreads faster than facts
In today's digital world, people routinely turn to the internet for health or medical information. In addition to actively searching online, they often come across health-related information on social media or receive it through emails or messages from family or friends. It can be tempting to share such messages with loved ones – often with the best of intentions. As a global health communication scholar studying the effects of media on health and development, I explore artistic and creative ways to make health information more engaging and accessible, empowering people to make informed decisions. Although there is a fire hose of health-related content online, not all of it is factual. In fact, much of it is inaccurate or misleading, raising a serious health communication problem: Fake health information – whether shared unknowingly and innocently, or deliberately to mislead or cause harm – can be far more captivating than accurate information. This makes it difficult for people to know which sources to trust and which content is worthy of sharing. Fake health information can take many forms. For example, it may be misleading content that distorts facts to frame an issue or individual in a certain context. Or it may be based on false connections, where headlines, visuals or captions don't align with the content. Despite this variation, such content often shares a few common characteristics that make it seem believable and more shareable than facts. For one thing, fake health information often appears to be true because it mixes a grain of truth with misleading claims. For example, early in the COVID-19 pandemic, false rumors suggested that drinking ethanol or bleach could protect people from the virus. While ethanol or bleach can indeed kill viruses on surfaces such as countertops, it is extremely dangerous when it comes into contact with skin or gets inside the body. Another marker of fake health information is that it presents ideas that are simply too good to be true. There is something appealingly counterintuitive in certain types of fake health information that can make people feel they have access to valuable or exclusive knowledge that others may not know. For example, a claim such as 'chocolate helps you lose weight' can be especially appealing because it offers a sense of permission to indulge and taps into a simple, feel-good solution to a complex problem. Such information often spreads faster because it sounds both surprising and hopeful, validating what some people want to believe. Sensationalism also drives the spread of fake health information. For instance, when critics falsely claimed that Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the chief medical adviser to the president at the time, was responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, it generated a lot of public attention. In a study on vaccine hesitancy published in 2020, my colleagues and I found that controversial headlines in news reports that go viral before national vaccination campaigns can discourage parents from getting their children vaccinated. These headlines seem to reveal sensational and secret information that can falsely boost the message's credibility. The internet has created fertile ground for spreading fake health information. Professional-looking websites and social media posts with misleading headlines can lure people into clicking or quickly sharing, which drives more and more readers to the falsehood. People tend to share information they believe is relevant to them or their social circles. In 2019, an article with the false headline 'Ginger is 10,000x more effective at killing cancer than chemo' was shared more than 800,000 times on Facebook. The article contained several factors that make people feel an urgency to react and share without checking the facts: compelling visuals, emotional stories, misleading graphs, quotes from experts with omitted context and outdated content that is recirculated. Visual cues like the logos of reputable organizations or photos of people wearing white medical coats add credibility to these posts. This kind of content is highly shareable, often reaching far more people than scientifically accurate studies that may lack eye-catching headlines or visuals, easy-to-understand words or dramatic storylines. But sharing content without verifying it first has real-world consequences. For example, studies have found that COVID-19-related fake information reduces people's trust in the government and in health care systems, making people less likely to use or seek out health services. Unfounded claims about vaccine side effects have led to reduced vaccination rates globally, fueling the return of dangerous diseases, including measles. Social media misinformation, such as false claims about cinnamon being a treatment for cancer, has caused hospitalizations and even deaths. The spread of health misinformation has reduced cooperation with important prevention and treatment recommendations, prompting a growing need for medical professionals to receive proper training and develop skills to effectively debunk fake health information. In today's era of information overload in which anyone can create and share content, being able to distinguish between credible and misleading health information before sharing is more important than ever. Researchers and public health organizations have outlined several strategies to help people make better-informed decisions. Whether health care consumers come across health information on social media, in an email or through a messaging app, here are three reliable ways to verify its accuracy and credibility before sharing: Use a search engine to cross-check health claims. Never rely on a single source. Instead, enter the health claim into a reputable search engine like Google and see what trusted sources have to say. Prioritize information from established organizations like the World Health Organization, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, United Nations Children's Fund or peer-reviewed journals like The Lancet or Journal of the American Medical Association. If multiple reputable sources agree, the information is more likely to be reliable. Reliable fact-checking websites such as and Snopes can also help root out fake information. Evaluate the source's credibility. A quick way to assess a website's trustworthiness is to check its 'About Us' page. This section usually explains who is behind the content, their mission and their credentials. Also, search the name of the author. Do they have recognized expertise or affiliations with credible institutions? Reliable websites often have domains ending in .gov or .edu, indicating government or educational institutions. Finally, check the publication date. Information on the internet keeps circulating for years and may not be the most accurate or relevant in the present context. If you're still unsure, don't share. If you're still uncertain about the accuracy of a claim, it's better to keep it to yourself. Forwarding unverified information can unintentionally contribute to the spread of misinformation and potentially cause harm, especially when it comes to health. Questioning dubious claims and sharing only verified information not only protects against unsafe behaviors and panic, but it also helps curb the spread of fake health information. At a time when misinformation can spread faster than a virus, taking a moment to pause and fact-check can make a big difference. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Angshuman K. Kashyap, University of Maryland Read more: Nutrition advice is rife with misinformation − a medical education specialist explains how to tell valid health information from pseudoscience Health misinformation is rampant on social media – here's what it does, why it spreads and what people can do about it Raw milk health risks significantly outweigh any potential benefits − food scientists and nutritionists explain why Angshuman K. Kashyap does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
France 24
15-05-2025
- Politics
- France 24
No, former Covid adviser Anthony Fauci isn't facing criminal charges in the US or elsewhere
A new wave of disinformation has surged online in the past week about Dr. Anthony Fauci, the White House's former Chief Medical Adviser under President Joe Biden. And this is far from the first time. Fauci, who is known as the architect of the American fight against Covid-19, is often targeted by anti-vaxxers; people opposed to the use of some or all vaccines. In recent weeks, Fauci has been under renewed attacks from conservative politicians. National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard, for one, has been spreading the theory that Covid-19 came from a lab in Wuhan, China and accusing Fauci of covering this up – and the fact that the United States was allegedly funding sensitive research in China. This is the backdrop for the false accusations that have been circulating on social media of late. Facebook posts have been circulating claiming that New Zealand has charged 'Fauci with 107,357 counts of negligible homicide' in relation to the Covid-19 vaccination and that "14 countries" had issued arrest warrants for him. Nicolas Hulscher, the administrator of a controversial American foundation, said on X that criminal referral requests had been filed against Fauci and others who helped to manage the pandemic in seven American states. These claims were widely spread on social media, garnering more than 900,000 views on X, Facebook and Instagram. While the first accusation is completely false, the second is missing important context. No countries have issued arrest warrants for Dr. Fauci 'BOOM: 107,357 COUNTS OF NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE – GLOBAL ARREST WARRANTS ISSUED AGAINST FAUCI,' reads a Facebook post in French published by Va Lou, a user who often relays conspiracies about the Freemasons, the deep state or vaccines. This message, which was widely shared in both French and English, comes from an article published on April 6 by the site AMG News. According to the site, Anthony Fauci had been charged in New Zealand with 107,357 counts of "negligent homicide" and was subject to arrest warrants filed by 14 countries, including Brazil, South Africa, Italy, Hungary and the Philippines. There is no information, however, about the nine other countries that have supposedly issued warrants. The Australian police confirmed these claims were false in an interview with Australian media outlet AAP FactCheck for an article published on May 1. "That is not accurate in any way whatsoever," a police spokesperson told the outlet, adding that there are no charges against Fauci in the country. Moreover, if you search for 'Fauci' on the New Zealand police's official website, then there are no results, which also contradicts these allegations. As for the arrest warrants supposedly issued by the other countries mentioned, we came up with no hits when we searched 'arrest' and 'Fauci' in the languages of each of these countries on Google. We also didn't see any sign of arrests on the official sites of their security forces. Moreover, when we did a search in the public database of Interpol – the intergovernmental agency that co-ordinates police co-operation amongst the 196 member countries – we found no wanted notice related to Fauci. Interpol publishes "red notices' for wanted people – requests to locate and provisionally arrest people for the purposes of extradition. Once again, there is no sign of Fauci's name. A site known for 'pseudoscience' and 'conspiracies' The source of this disinformation is the AMG News (American Media Group) website. Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC), a site specialised in evaluating the trustworthiness of media outlets, called AMG News 'a conspiracy and pseudoscience news source based in Romania". The site doesn't have an 'about page' or any information about its owners, which MBFC cites as further signs of a lack of transparency. The website shares conspiracy theories ranging from chemtrails to the deep state and often displays climate change scepticism and anti-vaccine rhetoric. Requests for criminal investigations with no legal weight The claim that criminal referrals had been issued in seven US states for Dr. Fauci and other key figures in managing the pandemic is missing important context. The claims come from an article by someone named Nicolas Hulscher, which was published on April 9 on the site Focal Point. The article cites a press release shared on April 8 by Vires Law Group, a Florida-based group that claims to defend American citizens from 'tyranny' and 'lawless actors'. In the press release, the group says that they made a request to the Arizona attorney general to open a criminal investigation into Dr. Fauci and other architects of the Covid-19 strategy. They say similar requests were made in several other states. So there have been requests for criminal investigations, as Hulscher claimed, but these carry no legal weight and do not constitute criminal referrals. Back in 2024, Vires Law Group issued a near-identical press release also making the same accusations against Fauci. At the time, US media outlet USA Today reported that these requests for criminal investigations did not constitute criminal referrals. 'Anyone or any group can contact local police, state police, sheriffs, district attorneys and/or the attorney general … and report facts and evidence they believe constitute criminal activity,' said Louisiana-based criminal law attorney Jim Boren in an interview with USA Today. This does not mean that an investigation will be opened or that criminal charges will be filed. A foundation known for releasing questionable material The author of the article, Nicolas Hulscher, says on X that he is an epidemiologist and an administrator at McCullough Foundation, an organisation that has sparked controversy, especially about its anti-vaccine stance. It was founded by Peter McCullough, an American cardiologist and former professor of medicine, who became a central figure spreading disinformation about Covid-19. Known for taking positions contrary to scientific consensus, McCullough spoke out against vaccines and promoted non-verified treatments (like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin). Many scientific reviews and media outlets have identified him as sharing false information about the pandemic. His foundation, which is also frequently criticised, shares studies and claims also contested by the scientific community. Some of these publications suggest a link between the Covid-19 vaccination and heart attacks – a theory disproved by medical research. Hulscher and McCullough are the main two contributors to the site Focal Point, an outlet that says it is focused on investigations into public policy, health, justice and news. Many of the articles on the site feature McCullough's anti-vaxx discourse.
