Philippine volcano trembles more, spews lava half-mile high.

Explanation: A volcano near the Philippine capital spewed lava into the sky and trembled constantly Tuesday, possibly portending a bigger and more dangerous eruption, as tens of thousands of people fled villages darkened and blanketed by heavy ash.

AP Top News, Manila, International News, Philippines, Science, United Nations, Asia Pacific, General News

Government work was suspended and schools were closed in a number of towns and cities, including Manila, because of health risks from the ash. Hundreds of flights were canceled or delayed, affecting tens of thousands of passengers. The restiveness of the Taal volcano and several new fissures in the ground nearby likely mean magma is rising and may lead to further eruptive activity, the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology said. The volcano was spurting fountains of red-hot lava 800 meters (half a mile) into the sky, and the massive column of ash and volcanic debris at times lit up with streaks of lightning. The alert level since the eruption began Sunday has been 4, indicating a hazardous eruption is possible in hours to days. Level 5, the highest, means such an eruption is underway. More than 350 volcanic earthquakes have been recorded near Taal since Sunday, U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said in New York. The Philippine institute said about 50 volcanic earthquakes were detected over eight hours Tuesday, indicating rising magma. It also warned that heavy and prolonged ash fall was possible in nearby villages. “The speed in the rise of magma is important (in determining) when the volcano will have a strong eruption and if it will slow down and freeze,” said Renato Solidum, who heads the institute. “As of now, we don’t see activities slowing down and the earthquakes still continue.” More than 38,000 people have been relocated so far to over 200 evacuation centers, Dujarric said. He said U.N. teams are visiting centers and supporting authorities, who have asked for help getting face masks. The picturesque volcano in the middle of a lake in Batangas province south of Manila rumbled to life Sunday in a powerful explosion that blasted a 15-kilometer (9-mile) column of ash, steam and rock into the sky. Clouds of volcanic ash blowing over Manila, 65 kilometers (40 miles) to the north, closed the country’s main airport Sunday and part of Monday until the ash fall eased. More than 500 international and domestic flights were canceled or delayed due to the overnight airport closure, affecting about 80,000 passengers, airport manager Ed Monreal told The Associated Press. “Hopefully the wind direction does not change. As long as the ash fall does not reach us, then we can be back to normalcy,” Monreal said. The disaster-response agency counted more than 40,000 evacuees in Batangas and nearby Cavite provinces who took shelter in nearly 200 evacuation centers. Officials expected the number to swell. Solidum warned residents from returning to high-risk villages based on perceptions that the eruption was easing. He warned of pyroclastic flows, super-heated material from the volcano that can travel at great speed and incinerate anything in their path. Solidum said it would take time for Taal’s restiveness to ease and the lives of affected villagers to return to normal but added it’s difficult to predict the volcano’s behavior with certainty. “We have to make sure that people understand and, of course, government, that this is not an activity that will just be a short while,” Solidum told a news conference. President Rodrigo Duterte visited hard-hit Batangas, which has been declared a calamity zone for faster disbursement of emergency funds. Accompanied by top disaster-response officials and Cabinet members, he promised the national government would help with the cleanup and reconstruction of the devastated province once the eruption ends. The government disaster-response agency has not provided details of damage but journalists saw dozens of houses ruined by heavy ash and frequent quakes in two Batangas areas. At least six people have been taken to a hospital in Tagaytay city in Cavite due to respiratory ailments caused by the ash, Health Secretary Francisco Duque III said. The eruption has not directly caused deaths or major damage. The death of a driver in a crash on an ash-covered road was linked to slippery conditions. The small island where the 1,020-foot (311-meter) volcano lies has long been designated a “permanent danger zone,” though fishing villages have long existed there. Those villages were all evacuated, though volcanology officials have called for a total evacuation of endangered communities within a 14-kilometer (8.7-mile) radius of Taal. Taal’s last disastrous eruption, in 1965, killed hundreds of people. It is the second-most restive of about two dozen active volcanoes in the Philippines, which lies along the Pacific “Ring of Fire,” where much of the world’s seismic activity occurs. A long-dormant volcano, Mount Pinatubo, blew its top north of Manila in 1991 in one of the biggest volcanic eruptions of the 20th century, killing hundreds of people. ___ Gomez reported from Manila. Associated Press journalists Celine Rosario and Kiko Rosario in Manila, Aaron Favila in Tagaytay and Edith M. Lederer at the United Nations contributed to this report.


Explanation: This story is about initial findings of a study abstract presented at the recent Experimental Biology conference in San Diego. The study looked at the effect of walnut consumption among older adults on cholesterol and other lipids. On the plus side, the story made it clear that the research was funded by the California Walnut Commission. However, the story missed the mark in many other ways; chiefly, it didn’t provide any quantified results from the study, nor did the story make it clear that the study findings were initial, and not yet published in any journal. Many Americans are struggling with heart disease, and diet plays an important part in this. Finding out if walnuts can help with heart health is a beneficial research endeavor. However, because groups like the California Walnut Commission are actively funding research, it’s important that journalists scrutinize the results, provide specifics on the data, and seek independent viewpoints on the research.

Since this is a study of older adults–who are often on fixed incomes–an estimate of cost would have made the story stronger. But because walnuts aren’t notably expensive compared to other nuts, we’ll give this a pass. There is no quantification in this story. The story says that the walnut eaters had reductions in bad cholesterol, but not how much. Is it even clinically significant? The story also says that neither group showed weight gain or changes in other cardiovascular markers, but nothing concrete is presented. A mention of good gut effects of walnuts is totally without any supporting information. About the only information actually given is that walnuts can be a fattening food and that portion control is necessary. The only harm mentioned is that walnuts can cause weight gain because they are high in calories. Because walnuts are a common food, there are no real expected harms except for those who are allergic to them. The story did not contain adequate details to help readers discern if this was a high-quality study or not. For example, how did they insure people actually ate the walnuts? One big red flag: These were findings presented at a conference–they haven’t been published in a peer-reviewed journal. Whenever that’s the case, journalists should be extra cautious, as it means other experts haven’t had a chance to review the work. There is no disease mongering here. Weight gain with age is fairly common and maintaining cardiovascular health is important. Close call on this one, but we’re going with Satisfactory, since the story did identify that the walnut research was funded by the California Walnut Commission, and an independent nutrition expert was quoted–although she didn’t talk about the study. Ideally, an outside source could have provided commentary on the research, providing insight into the quality of the evidence. There was no comparison of alternatives, either other nuts or foods or pharmaceuticals. This was a missed opportunity: If the article had explicitly stated the amount LDL was lowered in the intervention vs the control group, it might have compared other known interventions (statins, etc) that would achieve a similar effect. Walnuts are widely available everywhere, so this is not applicable. There have been many studies done on nuts and their effects on cardiovascular health, but these past studies were not referenced. How does this study specifically add to the body of research? There’s an implied reference that this might be the first time cholesterol-lowering benefits were tested in older adults, but it’s not clear. There is a news release that was obviously used in this story, but there was also an outside source, which is just enough to rate as Satisfactory.


Nearly 2/3 quarantined by LA universities are cleared.

Explanation: Almost two-thirds of the nearly 800 students, faculty and staff members who were quarantined following exposure to the measles virus at two Los Angeles universities have been cleared to resume normal activities.

Los Angeles, University of California, Health, Measles, California

The quarantine marked one of the most sweeping efforts by authorities to contain the nation’s measles outbreak, where cases have reached a 25-year high. People at California State University, Los Angeles and the University of California, Los Angeles were cleared after providing proof of immunity. At the Cal State campus, 435 students and employees were cleared by Monday afternoon, with 221 still under quarantine. Officials said they may have been exposed to an infected student who visited a school library. At UCLA, 27 people remained quarantined. People at that campus were in classes attended by an infected student.


For every dollar we invest in Head Start, we get $5 to $7 back into our economy.

Explanation: Rep. Tim Ryan says Head Start programs are cost beneficial

Ohio, Children, Federal Budget, Tim Ryan,

As part of Congress’ budget debates, Rep. Tim Ryan cautioned against major cuts while the economy is weak, and said he especially opposed cutting funds for Head Start. Head Start is a national program that tries to bolster school readiness through educational, health, nutritional, social and other services to enrolled children and families. While interviewing Ryan on Fox News, Greta Van Sustern criticized Head Start because of the academic performance of 8th graders in the Washington, D.C., school system. Ryan defended the program, claiming that "for every dollar we invest in Head Start, we get $5 to $7 back into our economy." That kind of return got our attention, so we decided to follow the statistical threads to see if Ryan’s claim is backed by whole cloth or solid evidence. We started with Ryan’s staff. They cited a paper from 2007 by scholars Jens Ludwig of the University of Chicago and Deborah A. Phillips of Georgetown University, which also alludes to other studies. The researchers conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the program and concluded that that Head Start’s return to taxpayers is greater than their investment in the program. They based their conclusion on studies that compared the performance over decades of siblings who enrolled in Head Start, and siblings that did not, for example. Among their findings: While Head Start doesn’t create jobs itself, children exposed to Head Start are more able to compete for better jobs than those without that exposure, they concluded. The Ludwig-Phillips paper also cited a study of Perry Preschool, an early care and education program in Michigan similar to Head Start, charting the progress of 3- and 4-year-olds through two years, and also examined their success rate through age 40. The researchers did issue a few caveats. Studying program participants over several decades allowed them to follow outcomes into adolescence and adulthood to assess longterm impacts, but they acknowledge that some of the data available to study children from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s was limited. Also, Head Start has changed over time, making it a challenge to apply the data to children in the program now. Forecasting outcomes from kids in Head Start now involves use of "a number of untestable assumptions," they said. Nonetheless, they concluded that with the average cost of Head Start at $9,000 per child, the early education and social intervention programs "are likely sufficient to generate benefits in excess of costs in both the short- and long-term." A letter sent to Congress in March 2011, signed by more than 300 researchers from around the country, also supported the notion that Head Start is cost effective. It cited a $7 to $9 return for every dollar invested in the programs based on the findings of 12 different studies and reports. They estimated that the program’s required medical screenings, vaccinations and emphasis reduced annual Medicaid expenses by $232 per family. And commentary about the scholarly tract by Ludwig and Phillips in a 2007 edition of Social Policy Report suggests that Head Start might have low-balled its own effectiveness. Commentary by W. Steven Barnett of Rutgers University on the Ludwig-Phillips paper cites studies of three different programs similar to Head Start, one of which found a 2.5 to 1 return ($2.50 for each $1), one that estimated a 10.1 to 1 return, and one that noted a 16.1 to 1 return. Each study examined a different public early care and education program and based its findings on myriad categories including earnings by people who went through the programs in early childhood. So how does Ryan’s statement fare on the Truth-O-Meter? The statement is accurate. Numerous studies support the notion that Head Start is cost beneficial. Ryan’s numbers land right in the middle of the cost-benefit estimates. While some are as high as $16.10 for each dollar spent, there are some as low as $2.50. That the researchers caution that forecasting outcomes from kids in Head Start now is difficult is an additional piece of information. While there’s decades of data, programs have also changed over time.


Plant-based egg maker gains from non-animal food buzz but lower costs key.

Explanation: Plant-based food startup JUST, shortly to launch its egg substitute in Europe as animal alternatives catch on, sees cutting costs as key to leaping beyond the niche alternative market and into the eating mainstream.

Demand for plant-based foods is growing fast as consumers worried about the environmental impact of meat production and keen to avoid a meat-heavy diet on health grounds look for alternative protein sources. JUST’s products including JUST Egg, a scrambled egg imitation made from mung beans, are available in the United States, Canada, China and Singapore, with sales evenly split between retailers including Walmart (WMT.N), Safeway and Whole Foods (AMZN.O), and restaurants such as Tim Hortons (QSR.TO). Chief Executive Josh Tetrick said cutting the costs of JUST Egg was key to broader acceptance. It is “really important for us to become one of the lowest cost proteins on the planet,” he said. “Today, our cost is 22 cents per serving. Our goal is to get to 12 cents next year and then ultimately below five.”  The cheapest supermarket eggs from non-caged hens cost around 16 cents each. Tetrick told Reuters that after launching in Europe a next logical step is achieving profitability, in advance of a possible listing to raise money. He has already raised about $250 million from investors around the world, including Mitsui, Temasek, China Construction Bank, Founders Fund, the Benioff family and the Heineken family. Tetrick, whose company employs about 120 people, sees his JUST Egg in European outlets in the next few months. “We will be launching in some locations, retailers and restaurants in Europe,” he said on the sidelines of an event in Zurich last week. Investors are taking notice of the growth in plant-based foods. U.S. startup Beyond Meat’s (BYND.O) stock has nearly tripled since it went public in May even though it is yet to turn a profit. Tetrick said his San Francisco-based company had hired longtime food industry executive Dave Wagstaff, with experience at global giants like McCain and free-range egg brand Happy Egg, to head its European team. “Our partners in Europe today include (Italian egg company) Eurovo, they’re doing the manufacturing and distribution, as well as German poultry group PHW and (online food delivery platform) Delivery Hero (DHER.DE).”  Tetrick said he was confident the company could get a slice of the $260 billion global egg market “if we get it right”. “We figured out the technology, but now we have to execute.”  Tetrick said the company was expecting low- to mid-double- digit million dollar revenues this year and should multiply sales by around seven next year. “Our most important financial objective is operating profitability,” he said. “We’ll get there some time in the next year.”


Almost 95 percent of all (Planned Parenthood) pregnancy services were abortions.

Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee supports the federal government cutting off more than $500 million to Planned Parenthood, calling the organization "an industry of abortion" in a recent Fox Business Channel interview. His interviewer, Fox Business reporter Sandra Smith, did not disagree — and she offered numbers to back up her point. "Almost 95 percent of all their pregnancy services were abortions," Smith said as she guest-hosted Mornings with Maria on July 28, 2015. We wanted to know if the percentage of abortions was really that high. We reached out to Smith for comment but did not hear back. 'Pregnancy services' Viewers may miss that Smith’s statement refers only to "pregnancy services." By choosing those words, she is likely referencing a fact sheet by the Susan B. Anthony List, a political action committee that opposes abortion and supports anti-abortion candidates. The Susan B. Anthony List’s numbers derive from Planned Parenthood’s 2013-14 annual report. The first caveat to know is that Planned Parenthood does not have a category for "pregnancy services." That’s a category the Susan B. Anthony List created, and the background reasoning has been the same as similarly misleading claims over the years. On the fact sheet, "pregnancy services" are broken down into three categories: abortions, prenatal care and adoption referrals. Susan B. Anthony List spokeswoman Mallory Quigley said these are the three ways a woman can respond to a pregnancy. With that in mind, here’s the section from Planned Parenthood’s annual report that contains those categories. To arrive at the Susan B. Anthony List figure, you have to tease out specific elements from the chart: prenatal services (18,684), adoption referrals (1,880) and abortions (327,653). Abortions account for 94 percent of the sum of these subcategories. For several reasons, that’s a misleading way to analyze the data. Referrals for prenatal care not in equation Not all of Planned Parenthood approximately 700 clinics offer prenatal services because prenatal care is not Planned Parenthood's focus. As a result, many pregnant women are referred to outside obstetricians or other health providers for prenatal care. How many? It's impossible to know. Planned Parenthood does not record how many pregnant patients are referred to outside health care providers, said Elizabeth Clark, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman. If referrals were included, the 95 percent figure would likely change, though we can't say by how much — and neither can Smith nor the Susan B. Anthony List. The rest of the story Planned Parenthood does not specifically track of the number of pregnant women who come into clinics for other reasons. And many of Planned Parenthood's services are not related to prenatal care, abortion or adoption. Testing and treatment for sexually transmitted disease and infection, both for men and women, accounts for the largest share of services provided by Planned Parenthood at more than 4.47 million. Contraception, which includes birth control, emergency contraception kits, and sterilization and vasectomy procedures, accounts for more than 3.58 million services. Different types of cancer screening and prevention, including breast exams, account for 935,573 services. As show on the chart above, there were also more than 1.1 million pregnancy tests, 47,2000 urinary tract infection treatments, or 65,500 "family practice services." Over the course of 2013-14, Planned Parenthood performed more than 10.5 million services. Sometimes patients are double-counted because they receive multiple services. Put another way. Planned Parenthood clinics saw 2.7 million individual patients that year. Of all services, abortions account for 3 percent of services performed, said Erica Sackin, a Planned Parenthood spokeswoman, pointing to page 18 of the report. But looking at the share of abortions per patient (and assuming one procedure per patient), the figure rises to 12 percent. Some critics have taken issue with Planned Parenthood’s measurement of "services." Performing an abortion is more involved than administering pregnancy tests or giving someone a contraception kit, for example. The share of abortions might be different if cost or hours of services were used. (However, that information is not in the 2013-14 annual report.) Our ruling Smith said, "Almost 95 percent of all (Planned Parenthood's) pregnancy services were abortions." An anti-abortion group puts the figure at 94 percent using a cherry-picked method that ignores the majority of Planned Parenthood's services, which aim to prevent pregnancies. The group describes "pregnancy services" as counting what Planned Parenthood does for women once they are already pregnant. But Planned Parenthood does not fully track this number, making the claim a leap of logic based on insufficient information. What's most noticeably missing among the number of Planned Parenthood services used by pregnant women are the number of pregnancy referrals. Planned Parenthood says it doesn't keep records of how many pregnant women are referred to outside healthcare providers. Without that information, we don't know an accurate percentage of "pregnancy services" that were abortions. Neither, however, does Smith. UPDATE: After this fact-check published, an official with Planned Parenthood contacted us and said that she was not authorized to speak on the record. A spokeswoman who is authorized to speak on the record, Elizabeth Clark, then provided us the same information. We've updated this fact-check to include her comments.


Rudy Giuliani correctly tweeted that a research lab in Wuhan, China, got a $3.7 million grant from the U.S. in 2017 despite a ban on such funding.

Explanation: What's true: A reproduced tweet by Giuliani about the U.S. giving $3.7M to a Wuhan lab in 2017 was real, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology was one of several institutions that received NIH research grants. What's false: The $3.7M in grant funding was an aggregate total divided among several different institutions; it was disbursed between 2014 and 2019 (under both the Obama and Trump administrations); and it was not a form of grant that had been prohibited in 2014.

On April 26, 2020, Rudy Giuliani, a former New York City mayor and a staunch ally of U.S. President Donald Trump, purportedly tweeted to criticize the Obama administration for supposedly having given “$3.7 million to the Wuhab lab in China” in 2017 — the site where the COVID-19 coronavirus originated, according to unfounded rumor, or “was created,” according to conspiracy theory. Some critics were quick to point out that former President Barack Obama was only president for less than three weeks in 2017, as Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th President of the United States on Jan. 20, 2017, so Giuliani was effectively criticizing Trump himself:  The above screenshot did reproduce a real tweet from Giuliani. And given that U.S. government funding is typically proposed, approved, budgeted, and appropriated long before it is actually disbursed, Giuliani’s reference to the year 2017 wasn’t necessarily as much of a gaffe as it might have superficially appeared. The former mayor still managed to get plenty wrong in a single tweet, however. As we noted in a previous article here on Snopes.com, the referenced $3.7 million comprised a series of multiple grants for coronavirus research issued by the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases over the course of several years to different entities, of which the Wuhan Institute of Virology was just one: Between 2014 and 2019, the EcoHealth Alliance was awarded a series of grants totaling approximately $3.7 million by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (a division of the National Institutes of Health) to study the “risk of future coronavirus (CoV) emergence from wildlife using in-depth field investigations across the human-wildlife interface in China.” Only a portion of this money has been used to fund research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, however, and approximately $700,000 of this grant money was awarded under the Trump administration. Under award number NIAID R01AI110964, NIH also funded studies produced by institutions in the United States, Australia, and Singapore, and the work involving the Wuhan Institute of Virology was an international collaboration with the New York-based EcoHealth Alliance. While these funds were originally appropriated by the NIH in 2014 during the Obama administration, the most recent payment, in 2019, was authorized by the Trump administration.


U.S. vaping-related deaths rise to 54, hospitalizations to 2,506.

Explanation: U.S. health officials said on Thursday two more deaths occurred since last week from a mysterious respiratory illness tied to vaping, taking the total toll to 54.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also reported 97 more hospitalized cases from 50 states, the District of Columbia, and two U.S. territories, as of Dec. 17. The number of people hospitalized now stands at 2,506. The deaths have been confirmed in 27 states and the District of Columbia, and the CDC said more deaths are under investigation. U.S. officials in November reported the discovery of Vitamin E acetate — believed to be used as a cutting agent in illicit vaping products containing marijuana components — in all lung samples from 29 patients. CDC has called Vitamin E acetate as a “chemical of concern” and recommended the substance not be added to e-cigarette, or vaping products, while the investigation is ongoing.


Explanation: This story reports the results of a small study of fluoxetine (trade name Prozac) for the treatment of anorexia nervosa. Fluoxetine is approved by the FDA for the treatment of bulimia nervosa; evidence for fluoxetine as a treatment for anorexia is less clear, and results from this study suggest no apparent benefit. The story mentions that fluoxetine is â€œoften used to treat anorexiaâ€, but this is an off-label use, which is not mentioned. It’s an important fact to include. The medication is more commonly prescribed for anorexic patients to treat depression and/or obsessive-compulsive disorder, common co-existing mental illnesses in these patients. The story partially describes the study design, but does not mention it was a double-blind, randomized study. The story provides absolute numbers of patients who completed the year-long study and maintained their weight. The story also appropriately notes that the difference in weight maintenance and time to relapse between the fluoxetine group and placebo group was not statistically significant. This was a small study, with less than half of the patients completing treatment, so the results may not be generalizable, especially for patients at earlier and less acute stages of anorexia. The patients in this study were recruited from eating disorders treatment centers and had been suffering with anorexia for several years (average was 4 years). The story mentions that one teenage study participant attempted suicide. Adolescent suicide has been linked to certain anti-depressant medications, including fluoxetine. No other harms or side effects of the drug are mentioned. Even though the source journal article did not list negative side effects of fluoxetine, that doesn’t remove the obligation to discuss these as part of a complete and balanced story. Lastly, the story provides several sources of information from researchers and clinicians not affiliated with the study to provide perspective on this study and the available treatment options for anorexia, a mental illness that some consider treatment-resistant. The story mentions behavioral treatments for anorexia, which have been somewhat effective, and notes that the study participants received psychotherapy (in the form of cognitive behavioral therapy) and medication.

The headline says “Prozac Failed Anorexic Women in Study,” so the story is not advocating fluoxetine as a treatment for anorexia. So, while the average cost of the drug is not mentioned, it is also not crucial in a story with this angle. The story provides absolute numbers of patients who completed the study and maintained their weight. The story also notes that the difference between the treatment group and the placebo group was not statistically significant and that there was no apparent benefit from this treatment. The story does not mention that these patients were recruited from eating disorders treatment centers and had anorexia for several years (average 4 years). This was also a small study, with less than half of the patients completing treatment, so the results may not be generalizable, especially for patients at earlier and less acute stages of anorexia. The story mentions that one teenage study participant attempted suicide. Adolescent suicide has been linked to certain anti-depressant medications, including fluoxetine. No other harms or side effects of the drug are mentioned. Even though the source journal article did not list negative side effects of fluoxetine, that doesn’t remove the obligation to discuss these as part of a complete and balanced story. The story partially describes the study design, but it does not mention that it was a double-blind, randomized study. The story presents some quantitative information on how many women completed the year-long study and how many maintained their weight during that time. The story does not mention that of the 49 assigned to fluoxetine, only 7 achieved a full recovery from anorexia. The story mentions that the difference between the people who took fluoxetine and those who took the placebo was not statistically significant. There is no evidence of disease mongering. The story provide prevalence statistics from The National Eating Disorders Association. The story provides several sources of information from researchers and clinicians not affiliated with the study. The story also noted that the lead author receives funding from Eli Lily, maker of fluoxetine, and that this company provided medication for the study. The story mentions behavioral treatment for anorexia and mentions that the study participants received psychotherapy (in the form of cognitive behavioral therapy) and medication. The story says, “Prozac is one of the antidepressants often used to treat anorexia.” Fluoxetine is approved by the FDA for the treatment of bulimia, but not anorexia. Use in clinical settings is off-label and typically for co-existing depression or obsessive compulsive disorder, for which fluoxetine is approved. Fluoxetine has been effective in treating symptoms of bulimia nervosa, but not anorexia. The story mentions that Prozac (fluoxetine) is used to treat anorexia, but this is an off-label use, which is not mentioned. This is an important fact. The medication is more commonly prescribed to treat depression and obsessive compulsive disorder, often co-existing mental illnesses in patients with anorexia. This story reported the effect of fluoxetine specifically on symptoms of anorexia. There is no evidence that this story relied solely or largely on a news release.


The health care reform plan would set limits similar to the "socialized" system in Britain, where people are allowed to die if their treatment would cost more than $22,000.

Explanation: Club for Growth's health care ad campaign is misleading

Like other groups criticizing health care reform, the conservative Club for Growth is using the August recess to try to stop the congressional effort to create a government-run health insurance option. Part of the Club's strategy will include a $1.2 million ad campaign aimed at Democrats who may be wavering about the plan. In the ad, a man weeps over someone lying in a hospital bed while the announcer says, "$22,750. In England, government health officials decided that's how much six months of life is worth. Under their socialized system if a medical treatment costs more, you're out of luck. That's wrong for America." That footage is interspersed with shots of the Capitol building and the whole thing is set to some very ominous music. You can watch it  here. The carefully worded ad doesn't directly say that the government is planning to put a price on our lives, but the implication is clear: The reform plan will lead to callous decisions that would allow people to die if they face a costly treatment. So that's what we're going to check — whether the reform plan would impose those kind of caps on treatment. At its heart, the Club for Growth's ad criticizes a medical approach known as comparative effectiveness research, which aims to find the most effective treatments for the lowest cost. Such research became a flashpoint during the stimulus debate, when the Conservatives for Patients Rights portrayed the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, a new board created by the stimulus bill to find the best health treatments, as being modeled after the British system. In fact, the board is very different from the British system, where government entities run the health care system and the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence — NICE for short — determines whether particular treatments are covered or not. The stimulus emphasized that the board is not meant to "mandate coverage, reimbursement, or other policies for any public or private payer" and that none of the board's reports or recommendations "shall be construed as mandates or clinical guidelines for payment, coverage, or treatment." So we gave the Conservatives for Patients Rights claim a  Barely True  . Once again, some Republicans have started linking the general premise of comparative effectiveness and what NICE does in Britain to describe how a government-run plan in the United States would discriminate against people who are older or very sick. Here's one such comment:     "I don't know for sure, but I've heard several senators say that Ted Kennedy with a brain tumor, being 77 years old as opposed to being 37 years old, if he were in England, would not be treated for his disease, because end of life — when you get to be 77, your life is considered less valuable under those systems," said Sen. Charles Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, in a news conference with reporters. NICE is an element in the Club for Growth ad as well. The ad refers to a December 2008 article in the  New York Times  that followed the case of Bruce Hardy, a British man who was denied a $54,000 drug by British health authorities. The article said the drug could have delayed his cancer progression for six months. Under NICE policies, the government would only pay about 15,000 pounds — or $22,750 — to save six months of Hardy's life. (NICE's limits are well known and have been widely discussed in the medical community.) The agency generally considers treatments cost-effective if they are less than $34,000 a year, according to an article in the  New England Journal of Medicine. But sometimes the agency will accept treatments that cost far more than that. So the Club for Growth's claim that NICE has a price limit of $22,750 for six months of life is roughly accurate, said Michael Cannon, a health policy expert with the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank that is often in step with the Club for Growth. But "does the (Obama health care) legislation say it's going to do what Britain is doing? The answer to that is no," said Cannon. Nevertheless, Cannon doesn't believe that the ad is too far off, pointing to a proposal by the White House that would create an independent group of health experts that would look for inefficiencies in Medicare coverage. "With the government assuming an even larger majority in health spending, it becomes very hard to argue that they won't have to ration... [Club for Growth] is implying that this is where it would lead and that's valid." But at this point, that proposal is not included in either the House or the Senate bill, so we believe it's quite a stretch for the Club for Growth to suggest it would be part of the health reform plan. Dr. Sean Tunis, a former top official at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid under the Bush administration and current director of the Center for Medical Technology Policy, says the ad is misleading. "We have a public plan now, and that's Medicare," Tunis said. "And Medicare doesn't put a price on life. ... That seems like a fallacious connection to me." The only initiative from the Obama administration along those lines is the increase in funding for comparative effectiveness research through the stimulus. That data would be used to help doctors and patients make better drug and procedure decisions, not dictate treatment, he said. So, back to the Club for Growth ad. Although our experts agree that it gets the NICE statistic correct about the British practice, the ad's main point about cost limits is incorrect. There is no such practice in the comparative effectiveness program, nor is it part of the current health reform proposals pending in Congress. The House and Senate bills under consideration would not require the government to decide how much a person's life is worth. As a result, we give the Club for Growth a .


A man killed himself over the Treasury's decision to add an African-American abolitionist's portrait to the $20 bill.

Explanation: Empire Herald carries no disclaimer warning readers that its content consists solely of fake news items. Previous hoaxes advanced by that site include claims about a dog meat restaurant and another about a serial killer who purportedly carved “Black Lives Matter” into his victims’ skin.

Junk News, empire herald, harriet tubman, suicide

On 21 April 2016, the web site Empire Herald published an article reporting that a 61-year-old (“caucasian”) man from North Carolina had killed himself upon learning that a portrait of 19th century African-American abolitionist Harriet Tubman was to replace that of Andrew Jackson on the front of the U.S. $20 bill, writing in his suicide note that he hoped Donald Trump would be elected to “make America white again”: Gary-Jo Henderson, 61, of Charlotte was known by friends and family as a hardcore American currency collector. His wife, Martha Henderson is a collector of Civil War memorabilia. Both traveled acrossed the country to buy and auction off their historical collections. According to reports, Mrs. Henderson arrived at their residence at approximately 6:15 P.M. when she discovered her husband, unresponsive in his home office. Mrs. Henderson immediately called 911 while attempting to resuscitate her husband. According to Mrs. Henderson, “After I found my husband slumped over in his chair, I ran over to him to see if he was okay. When he did not respond to me, I checked to see if he was sleeping and that is when I saw that he was not breathing. I called 911 and I tried to give him CPR until the ambulance arrived. After a few attempts, I notice an empty bottle of Percocets on his desk. I then saw a note near the bottle which read’Make American White Again’. When I opened the letter, that is when I found out he committed suicide. … Reportedly, part of the letter read, ‘It’s a shame that one of our founding fathers is being replaced by a N**GER. I never thought I would live to see a spade in the White House and now one of them will be on the money we spend each day. I’m tired of seeing N**GERS taking over our great nation. I refuse to live in a world overrun by Blacks. I hope Trump wins so we can make America White Again!” This story was just another clickbait fabricated report from the Empire Herald fake news site, and as is often the case, the Empire Herald simply appropriated an extant, unrelated crime scene photograph and attached it to their fictional story. In this instance, the image dated to January 2014 and involved a man who was shot by a deputy whom he had attempted to run over in a stolen car.


Extracting the facts about pomegranate pills

Explanation: This was not one of the LA Times’ Healthy Skeptic columns, but it may as well have been. As that column often does, this story dampened the hype surrounding claims for pomegrante juice and pills. We especially appreciate the point-by-point analysis of evidence that the story undertook. A cardiologist quoted in the story said, “If people want to take them, that’s fine, but it’s not based on any scientificallly valid information….There’s no definitive clinical trial demonstrating a beneficial effect of pomegranate fruit, juice or pills in people.”

The story includes the cost of pomegranate pills. The story included critical analysis of claims of benefit, including the overview quote:  “There’s no definitive clinical trial demonstrating a beneficial effect of pomegranate fruit, juice or pills in people.” There are potential harms of the supplement including drug interactions with several common medications including antidepressants as listed in Medlineplus. A description of these potential harms can be found at:  http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/natural/392.html#Safety So there are not only questions about benefits, there are very real harms to consider as well. Excellent point-by-point evaluation of the evidence for claims made about purported benefits for the heart and for the prostate. No disease-mongering here. Good sourcing with independent experts and identification of company funding for one researcher. The ending quote delivers an appropriate contextual wrapup:  “If they’re part of an overall healthy diet, I don’t object,” (Dr. John Gordon Harold, cardiologist says), but I’m not sure the ends justify the means.” The story could have reminded readers that there is evidence for how to reduce risk of heart disease, such as smoking cessation and exercise. Also, there are a variety of therapies for erectile dysfunction. The availability of pomegranate-containing fruit and pills is clear in the story. Not applicable. No claims of novelty were made. Independent reporting throughout.


Estrogen Patch in Newly Postmenopausal Women May Reduce Alzheimer’s Risk

Explanation: A small pilot study has found that giving recently postmenopausal women estrogen via a patch is associated with reduced depositions of amyloid in the brain (a hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease) relative to women who received estrogen orally or who took a placebo. Additionally, the study found that the association was strongest among women with a greater genetic risk of Alzheimer’s disease. The study was carefully done, and the news release offers some useful details about the study’s methods. However, the study included just 68 women, too few to make the patterns found reliable. To its credit, the release quotes the lead author about the need for larger replications. But that begs the question of why the Mayo Clinic seeks to publicize this work at all, particularly with a news release headline that emphasizes disease reduction potential, when the study only looked at amyloid levels, a risk marker. There is very active debate as to whether lowering amyloid will have any impact on actual symptoms or rates of Alzheimer’s disease. A better headline might have been: “Pilot Study Suggests Estrogen Patch in Newly Postmenopausal Women Reduces Amyloid, Marker of Alzheimer’s Risk.” Journalists certainly deserve to know about this study, but they need to keep it in their back pockets until more rigorous clinical studies have been done. Whether estrogen replacement therapy is of value to postmenopausal women is contested territory, and researchers, including those in the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study from which this research stems, are trying to explore the contingencies, if any, that distinguish women who could benefit from estrogen supplementation from those who may not. This study adds to a body of work looking at the “timing hypothesis,” that is, the notion that estrogen has different effects in the heart and brain when given to younger postmenopausal woman compared to women in their 60s or 70s. Studies of effects on the heart using intermediate disease markers (carotid artery thickness, analogous to heart disease in the way that amyloid deposition is to Alzheimer disease) in lieu of clinical outcomes (heart attacks, cognitive impairment) have been appearing in journals over the past two years. Considered in this context, the research is of interest but needs to be shared with a strong dose of qualifiers.

Alzheimer's disease,Hospital news release

Costs for hormone therapy are readily available but they are not broached in this release. Although the news release summarizes the pattern of results—that recently postmenopausal women who received estrogen via a skin patch were found to have “lower” amyloid depositions in their brains relative to those who took estrogen by mouth or who were in the placebo group—that pattern is not explained in any numerical or statistical way. Is it a strong association? A weak one? We have no idea from the release. According to the published report, the benefits were statistically significant but the sample size was too small to be meaningful. Just 21 of the enrolled women received the patch, 30 received a placebo and 17 received estrogen orally. Early in the text, the writer notes that one large, older study—the Women’s Health Initiative at NIH—has found an association between use of estrogen and an increased risk of dementia among women 65 or older. The study highlighted here, in contrast, focuses on women five to 36 months past menopause, individuals predominantly in their 50s. The potential long-term effects of estrogen use by these younger women is not mentioned in the release. Estrogen carries a well-known small increase in risk for breast cancer and blood clots, which could have been briefly acknowledged. In addition, the National Library of Medicine states that estradiol, the form of estrogen used in transdermal patches, “increases the risk that you will develop endometrial cancer (cancer of the lining of the uterus [womb]). The longer you use estradiol, the greater the risk that you will develop endometrial cancer.” Other minor side effects include head ache, breast pain and nausea, among others. The release offers some specifics about the study design, but it doesn’t highlight the randomized, blinded nature of the study. That said, it describes the study framework: “Of the 68 women, 21 received estrogen via a skin patch, 17 received estrogen orally and 30 received a placebo. Amyloid deposition was lower in women who received the patch, compared to the placebo, and the effect was most apparent in women with the APOE e4 genotype. The oral treatment was not associated with lower amyloid deposition.” The release includes a comment from the lead study author regarding the need to confirm the findings by replicating the study with larger samples. But even that comment neglects the larger question of whether reducing amyloid has any effect at all on Alzheimer’s symptoms or risk. The overall implication that there’s a causal relationship, strongly inferred in the headline, earns this a not satisfactory rating. The release doesn’t exaggerate a condition. It states that declines in estrogen associated with menopause “may” be associated with an increased risk of dementia. Unfortunately, that doesn’t give readers a feel for the robustness of the relationship, or for the evidence supporting it. Funders are identified, and the single scientist in the release is clearly identified as the study’s lead author. The release offers no other approaches available to postmenopausal women for reducing Alzheimer’s disease risk and that’s appropriate in this case. It would be an over-reach to try and name the many other Alzheimer’s disease prevention options being studied. In addition, the findings address an intermediate endpoint, i.e. amyloid deposition as a disease marker, not the disease itself. It’s common knowledge that numerous estrogen supplements —  including those delivered via patch — are readily available. The lead author makes a priority claim in the release, which seems to be justified. Words employed by both the text and the researchers, the latter via quotes, are straightforward.


Indonesia doctor hits the streets to curb coronavirus.

Explanation: After a busy session at his clinic, Indonesian doctor Fakhrurrozi hops on the back of a motorized tricycle with a loud-hailer to urge residents to stay at home to curb the spread of the coronavirus.

Fakhrurrozi, 53, who uses one name, started the initiative along with three volunteers last month after Indonesia recorded its first COVID-19 cases in his neighborhood of Depok, to the south of capital, Jakarta.”I feel responsible to go into the community to provide education about the disease,” said the doctor, who spends several hours after his morning clinic driving around three times a week.His mission appears to be taking on added impetus after the world’s fourth-most populous country announced on Friday its biggest one-day surge in coronavirus cases, up 153 to 1,046. Indonesia has also recorded the highest number of deaths in Southeast Asia at 87.”From the existing data and numbers, the trend is similar all over Indonesia, increases every day,” Fakhrurrozi said at his clinic, where nurses use raincoats and masks as make-shift protective gear. “Therefore, it is important that the people are aware and obey the rules of not leaving their houses, maintaining social distancing and take care of cleanliness.”  Indonesian President Joko Widodo has so far resisted ordering a complete lockdown in the country of more than 260 million people, but some provincial governments have urged people to stay home for at least two weeks.Jakarta, where many residents of Depok work, has been under a state of emergency since March 23 with bars, cinemas and other entertainment centers ordered to close .”There are still many residents who don’t know about coronavirus,” said volunteer Askar Kustiwa, explaining why he had decided to help the doctor with his mission.


Malawi becomes 1st nation to immunize kids against malaria.

Explanation: The World Health Organization says Malawi has become the first country to begin immunizing children against malaria, using the only licensed vaccine to protect against the mosquito-spread disease.

Malaria, Health, Africa, International News, GlaxoSmithKline, Europe, Malawi

Although the vaccine only protects about one-third of children who are immunized, those who get the shots are likely to have less severe cases of malaria. The parasitic disease kills about 435,000 people every year, the majority of them children under 5 in Africa. “It’s an imperfect vaccine but it still has the potential to save tens of thousands of lives,” said Alister Craig, dean of biological sciences at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, who is not linked to WHO or vaccine. Craig said immunizing the most vulnerable children during peak malaria seasons could spare many thousands from falling ill or even dying. The vaccine, known as Mosquirix, was developed by GlaxoSmithKline and was approved by the European Medicines Agency in 2015. A previous trial showed the vaccine was about 30% effective in children who got four doses, but that protection waned over time. Reported side effects include pain, fever and convulsions. Pedro Alonso, director of WHO’s malaria program, said similar vaccination programs would begin in the coming weeks in Kenya and Ghana, with the aim of reaching about 360,000 children per year across the three countries. Alonso called the vaccination rollout a “historical moment,” noting that it was significantly more difficult to design a vaccine against a parasite as opposed to a bacterium or virus. He acknowledged the vaccine was flawed but said the world could not afford to wait for a better option. “We don’t know how long it will take to develop the next-generation vaccine,” he said. “It may be many, many years away.” In the meantime, he said, the stalled progress against malaria demanded new tools now. Resistance is growing to medicines that treat the disease, while mosquitoes are becoming more resistant to insecticides. In addition, funding for malaria efforts has plateaued in recent years. It took GSK and partners more than 30 years to develop the vaccine, at a cost of around $1 billion. GSK is donating up to 10 million vaccine doses in the current vaccination initiatives. A company spokesman said GSK is working with partners to secure funding for potentially broader vaccination programs. Some experts warned the vaccination programs should not divert limited public health funds from inexpensive and proven tools to curb malaria such as bed nets and insecticides. “This is a bold thing to do, but it’s not a silver bullet,” said Thomas Churcher, a malaria expert at Imperial College London. “As long as using the vaccine doesn’t interfere with other efforts, like the urgent need for new insecticides, it is a good thing to do.” Craig said one of health officials’ biggest challenges could be convincing parents to bring their children for repeated doses of a vaccine that only protects about a third of children for a limited amount of time. More commonly used vaccines, like those for polio and measles, work more than 90 percent of the time. “This malaria vaccine is going to save many lives, even if it is not as good as we would like,” Craig said. “But I hope this will kick-start other research efforts so that the story doesn’t end here.”


“In ‘Resident Evil’ the Umbrella Corporation releases a virus that infects the people of Raccoon City. A biological research lab with the exact same logo as the Umbrella Corporation can be found in the city where the coronavirus outbreak originated.”

Explanation: The biological research lab with a logo similar to the fictional lab from the “Resident Evil” video game is based in Shanghai, more than 500 miles from Wuhan, China. There’s no evidence that the 2019 coronavirus that was first detected in Wuhan was created in a lab. It likely has its origins in bats, according to the CDC.

China, Public Health, Facebook Fact-checks, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,

An image making the rounds on social media draws a supposedly eerie connection between the outbreak of the coronavirus in Wuhan, China, and the fictional virus that triggers the dangerous mutations at the center of the plot for "Resident Evil," a Japanese video-game series. The image says that the fictional lab responsible for the virus in the "Resident Evil" franchise has the same logo as a real-life lab in Wuhan, where the coronavirus was first detected. The problem with that claim: The Chinese lab with that logo is actually based in Shanghai, a roughly nine-hour drive from Wuhan. "In ‘Resident Evil’ the Umbrella Corporation releases a virus that infects the people of Raccoon City," the image, posted to Facebook as early as Jan. 27, says. "A biological research lab with the exact same logo as the Umbrella Corporation can be found in the city where the coronavirus outbreak originated. Corona is an anagram for Racoon." A screenshot of a Facebook post about the coronavirus and a fictional lab from the "Resident Evil" video game. The post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat  news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.) Without getting too far into the details of "Resident Evil," it’s clear that the post is inaccurate, as other fact-checkers have noted. In fact, the post gives itself away. Beneath the logo for the biological research lab identified in the image is the company’s real name, Shang Hai Ruilan Bao Hu San Biotech Limited. The company does have a blue-and-white logo that closely resembles the red-and-white logo from the fictional lab in "Resident Evil." But according to the company’s website, the lab is based in Shanghai, which is more than 500 miles by car away from Wuhan, per Google Maps. What’s more, there’s no evidence that the novel 2019 coronavirus was created in a lab. We’ve debunked a number of claims — like the Facebook post in question — that suggested the new virus was artificially made in Wuhan or elsewhere. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the new coronavirus is a "beta coronavirus" similar to severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, and Middle East respiratory syndrome, or MERS. All three viruses are believed to have their origins in bats. We rate this post .


City Budget, City Government, Health Care, Public Health, Women, Texas, Ora Houston,

Public health’s focus on HIV/AIDS typically tilts toward men. That’s because men who have sex with men still face the greatest risk of getting the disease and represent most new cases. But out of the spotlight, how are women faring? "HIV/AIDS among women is skyrocketing in Austin," Austin City Council Member Ora Houston told council colleagues Sept. 8, 2015, "and we need to do some specific targeting for that." Houston, who represents District 1, sought an additional  $150,000 in spending in the 2015-16 budget year for the Austin/Travis County Health and Human Services Department’s HIV/AIDS initiatives. Houston’s ask was made in the context of bolstering efforts aimed at improving the quality of life of African-Americans in Austin, an initiative the city launched several years ago. The proposal didn’t win council approval, although the department drew a 16-percent surge in its overall budget. Also, it turns out, Houston wasn’t right about HIV and AIDS among Austin women "skyrocketing." Yet for decades and across the nation, African-Americans have been the racial group hardest hit--with black women the most disproportionately affected. It’s a wide gap that similarly persists in Travis County. Houston says she misspoke Houston, asked how she reached her "skyrocketing" declaration, told us by phone she misspoke. "The larger issue is what do we do to save the women in my community infected with HIV/AIDS," she said. Some background: In Travis County, fewer than one in 10 residents is black, but more than one in five of the 4,401 residents living with HIV at the end of 2014 was black, according to health department data. Also that year, nearly 711 in every 100,000 black females living in the county, or 318 individuals, had the human immunodeficiency virus that causes AIDS. That was double the number of Hispanic females (156) and nearly triple the number of white females (109) living with HIV. From another vantage point, the rate of black females living with HIV in Travis County was over 17 times higher than the rate for white females and nearly nine times higher than the rate for Hispanic females. There were still many more men, of all races, with HIV. The rate of black males living in the county with HIV was 1,589.4 per 100,000 in 2014, reflecting 670 individuals. The rates were 634.9 for white males (1,743 people) and 617.8 for Hispanic males (1,235 individuals). Put another way, the rate of black males living with HIV/AIDS in Travis County was 2.5 times higher than the rate for white or Hispanic males. A national pattern The disparity in rates of African American women getting infected with HIV or diagnosed with AIDS, which has deepened since the epidemic began, is rooted in a variety of factors, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office on Women’s Health. A key factor is poverty, which is more widespread in the African-American community and can result in less access to care and, often, a failure to know one’s HIV status. Also, the office says, because African-Americans tend to have sex with partners of the same race, and because the disease is higher in that population, their risk of getting HIV is greater. "Stigma, fear, discrimination, homophobia and negative perceptions about HIV testing can also place too many African-American women at higher risk," the Office on Women’s Health says. "Many at risk for infection fear stigma more than infection. They may choose instead to hide their high-risk behavior rather than get counseling and testing." No skyrocket among Travis County women In Travis County, annual diagnoses of HIV and AIDS for women mostly declined from 2005 through 2014, health department figures show. Most recently, 4 in 100,000 female residents in the county were newly diagnosed with HIV in 2014 compared to an average 6.1 incidence rate from 2005 through 2013. The AIDS incidence rate for all women in the county was 1.9 per 100,000 women in 2014 compared to an average 4.3 rate from 2005 through 2013. Women of all races represented a small number of Travis County residents diagnosed with HIV in 2014: just 23 of the 244 cases. Also in 2014, 98 Travis County residents, including 11 females, were diagnosed with full-blown AIDS. We did not learn how many black females fell into these categories. Health department staff epidemiologist Jeff Taylor advised us by phone that because very few women are diagnosed with HIV/AIDS each year, the department doesn't publicly release raw numbers based on by race and ethnicity. "Some of those numbers may be one, two, three or four, and people get concerned about confidentiality," Taylor said. We were, however, able to compare rates among racial and ethnic groups for a decade. Each year, from 2005 through 2014, the rates of HIV and AIDS among African-American males and females in Travis County was higher than the rates among Hispanics and whites. The far higher rates in black females, when compared to Hispanic and white females, are "startling," Shannon Jones III, director of the city/county health department, said at a recent conference on health disparities. Then again, the data show a 27 percent drop in new HIV diagnoses for black females between 2013 and 2014, though there was an increase in AIDS diagnoses; the incidence of 16 black females per 100,000 black women was up from 12.3 in 2013. Between 2013 and 2014, HIV rates also fell for white females but ticked up among Hispanic females from 3.2 per 100,000 in 2013 to 3.7 per 100,000 in 2014. New diagnoses of HIV are the best barometer of how the disease is trending in a community, Taylor said. Between 2005 and 2014, the rate of new HIV infections for black females in the county ranged from a high of 42.9 per 100,000 black women in 2006 to a low of 19.4 in 2011. Our ruling Houston said HIV/AIDS among women is skyrocketing in Austin. That’s not so. While black women have persistently been diagnosed with HIV/AIDS at higher rates than other women, HIV/AIDS incidence rates for Travis County women declined for most of the past decade. The statement is not accurate.


Calorie counts on menus used by women, wealthier diners in Seattle area.

Explanation: Women, higher-income diners and patrons of fast-food restaurants in the Seattle area are more likely to use restaurant calorie count information, according to survey results published on Tuesday.

The research findings from Washington State’s King County, which includes the city of Seattle, add to a growing body of data on how such disclosures, meant to curb the U.S. obesity epidemic, may influence dining habits. The study was based on surveys of more than 3,000 King County residents who frequent chain restaurant. It began eight months before the county required restaurants to post calorie information at the beginning of 2009, and continued for two years after that. Women, higher-income individuals and diners who ate at fast-food chains said they were the most likely to use the information. White, higher-income and obese customers were more likely to see the calorie information. Researchers did not ask how diners put calorie information to use. “It was a confirmation that if you post calorie information, more people are going to see it and more people are going to use it,” said Roxana Chen, lead author and social research scientist for public health for Seattle and King County. The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and published online by the American Journal of Public Health. Chen said the latest study builds on related RWJF-funded research published in 2013. In that study, researchers examined receipts from more than 7,300 King County restaurant customers and found that patrons, particularly women, who saw the calorie counts purchased fewer calories than those who did not. King County was the second U.S. jurisdiction, after New York City, to implement a calorie counts under a menu-labeling law.


AIDS center at UAB getting grant for HIV research.

Explanation: The University of Alabama at Birmingham is getting a $7.5 million grant to help in the fight against HIV.

Health, General News, Epidemics, Infectious diseases, Birmingham, Alabama

A news release says the money will go to UAB’s Center for AIDS Research. It comes as a renewed grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The statement says the center will use the grant to help fight the AIDS epidemic both in Alabama and the Southeast. Researchers will look at social, behavioral and medical factors that contribute to HIV exposure and transmission. UAB’s office is one of 19 Centers for AIDS Research established nationwide by the National Institutes of Health. The UAB center is in his 31st year of research.


Facebook post Says researchers found a “fabric that kills coronaviruses”

Explanation: “Electroceutical fabric” was developed in 2017 as an antimicrobial wound dressing, but a new study shows it is also effective at neutralizing coronaviruses. The makers are seeking FDA emergency approval to use it for COVID-19 face masks. Metal embedded in the fabric creates an electric current that stops the virus from assembling and attaching to the host after a minute of exposure to the electrical field. These findings are in a preliminary study that has not yet gone through the peer-review process.

Public Health, Wisconsin, Coronavirus, Facebook posts,

Editor's note: This story has been updated to clarify the development of this type of fabric dates back to 2005, when it was patented by Jeffry Skiba and Lawrence Schneider. There’s reason to be skeptical of any Internet post claiming something kills the coronavirus. Facebook in particular can be a deluge of home remedies that range from unproven to downright dangerous. So you’d be forgiven for raising your eyebrows if you came across a May 21, 2020, Indianapolis Monthly article shared widely on Facebook saying researchers have found a "fabric that kills coronaviruses." But this claim has science behind it — preliminary though it may be. Researchers discovered low-level electric fields can render the coronavirus unable to infect a host after just a minute of exposure to the field. This post was flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook). Here’s what we know so far about this product. Though the application to the novel coronavirus is new, the technology isn’t. The concept — called electroceutical fabric — was developed more than a decade ago, patented in 2005 by Jeffry Skiba and Lawrence Schneider. Itis  approved by the FDA as a wound dressing and sold by Vomaris under the name Procellera. Chandan Sen, now the director of the Indiana Center for Regenerative Medicine and Engineering at the Indiana University School of Medicine, conducted a study in 2017 demonstrating the fabric's effectiveness as an antimicrobial wound dressing. And now he is applying the technology to combat COVID-19, with encouraging early results. When the coronavirus pandemic began, Sen thought about ways his research could help, he said in a YouTube video released through Indiana University. "We tried to put some time into understanding the physical make of this virus, and are there perhaps some weak points we could target," Sen said. Sen detailed the potential application to COVID-19 on May 14, 2020, in a preliminary study released online at the preprint server ChemRxiv. The site publishes early versions of studies ahead of formal peer review and publication. Coronaviruses in general rely on electrostatic interactions to assemble themselves into an infective form and attach to a host. The electroceutical fabric consists of polyester printed with a series of metal dots — alternating silver and zinc — printed on the fabric in a geometric pattern. There is no wire or external battery, but these metals when exposed to moisture create microcell batteries that generate an electrical charge. "We thought then our dressing (could be) capable of disrupting those electrostatic forces, and we started testing it and the results have seemed very promising," Sen said in the video. "You’re using a very weak electric field which is not harmful to humans … but is capable of dismantling bacterial infections, we are currently working on fungal infection, and now we see it can also incapacitate, if you will, viruses." Vomaris has applied through the FDA's Emergency Use Authorization program to use the fabric for COVID-19 face masks. The Indianapolis Star reported May 26, 2020, the company is hoping to use the fabric to develop two products: A washable mask with a disposable electroceutical fabric layer can be inserted, and another mask designed for one-time use. The company hopes to have the products on the market by the fall flu season. "Use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is essential to safeguard healthcare providers against COVID-19," Sen’s study says. "However, use of these PPE itself poses significant threat as doffing of contaminated PPE carrying viable viral particles is likely to infect the person and potentially spread infection." An article spread widely on Facebook says researchers have discovered a "fabric that kills coronaviruses" This particular application has not yet been peer-reviewed or approved by the FDA, but initial research shows electroceutical fabric is indeed able to neutralize the virus after a minute of contact with the electrical field generated by the fabric. The company that already manufacturers this product for use as a wound dressing hopes to have it ready for release later this year in antiviral face masks. So the signs are good, but given these findings are preliminary and haven’t yet been subject to peer review.


Trump administration signals compromise on gas mileage rules.

Explanation: The Trump administration is signaling that it could increase fuel economy standards, possibly compromising on its push to freeze them at 2020 levels.

General News, Environment, Business, U.S. News, Economy

In one of the administration’s hardest-fought battles to roll back Obama-era environmental regulations, two federal agencies submitted a final rule on gas mileage and greenhouse gas emissions on Tuesday. But they would not give details until the rule is reviewed and formally published by the Office of Management and Budget. Still, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says in a statement that it believes the rule, written jointly with the Environmental Protection Agency, will improve gas mileage and reduce emissions from the U.S. fleet of new vehicles. The statement also said the rule would make new vehicles more affordable for Americans, thereby putting more new vehicles on the road that are safer than the ones they replaced. “When finalized, this rule will be a win for all Americans,” the statement said. Last year, the administration’s proposed freeze touched off a huge legal fight with California, which has authority under the Clean Air Act to set its own greenhouse gas emissions, and by extension, gas mileage standards. Trump revoked California’s authority, and the state challenged the decision in court. Later, the auto industry split on the matter with four companies, Ford, BMW, Volkswagen and Honda, siding with California. Most other automakers went with Trump. When the Trump administration released its proposed “Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule” in August of 2018, it was panned by environmental groups who said the calculations were flawed. Even the EPA’s Science Advisory Board, mainly appointed by Trump, questioned the rationale in a draft report late last year. “There are significant weaknesses in the scientific analysis of the proposed rule,” the board wrote. The administration’s preferred option to Obama-era fuel efficiency standards was a freeze at 2020 levels, which it contended would save 12,700 lives from car crashes during the life of new vehicles through model year 2029. The logic was that relaxed fuel mileage standards would cut the cost of vehicles, making them more affordable and increasing sales. Since new vehicles are safer, lives would be saved. In 2018, EPA staffers privately challenged the rationale for the freeze, saying the proposal would actually increase U.S. highway deaths. In an email, senior EPA staffers told the White House that it would slightly increase highway deaths, by 17 annually.


The United States' top infectious diseases expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, said people in the U.S. do not need to wear masks to protect against COVID-19.

Explanation: In the March 2020 clip, Fauci said: “Right now in the United States people should not be walking around with masks … You should think of healthcare providers who are needing them and the people who are ill.”

Another rumor about the efficacy of wearing masks during the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic made the rounds in June 2020, a topic we have debunked numerous times at Snopes. A “60 Minutes” interview from early March 2020 with Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the leading members of President Donald Trump’s coronavirus task force, was being regurgitated on social media. In the segment,  Fauci said there was no reason people in the U.S. needed to wear a mask. The problem? That clip is old, and Fauci was simply echoing what many others argued at that time, including the U.S. Surgeon General, the World Health Organization (WHO), and The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Since then, Fauci’s views and that of most organizations have changed, as more information became available about the disease.


Music May Help Ease Pain for Anxious People

Explanation: Far more questions than answers are provided by this story – see some of our questions below. In the end, it’s not clear why this recycled news release is even newsworthy. In the huge wave of medical science stories that flood the American public every day, editorial decision-makers need to evaluate what the impact is of overwhelming readers with an endless stream of stories about findings, about progress in research, about un-analyzed medical minutiae. Journalists have an obligation to filter, to assess, to analyze, to evaluate – not merely to open the floodgates to unvetted news releases.

Cost is not particularly relevant in this case. No adequate explanation was given of the measurement of how “pain was reduced” and no quantification was given of the degree of reduction nor of how many of the 143 study participants experienced what degree of pain relief. Not applicable;  we don’t know what harm could come from attempts at music therapy The story was taken directly from a news release, spewing exactly what was said in the news release and no more. There was no critical analysis. There was no independent perspective evaluating the finding. The story was unclear about whether pain or anxiety was the dominant issue. The story also did not explain that shocking volunteers is not the same as studying patients with a clinical pain condition. Not applicable. Readers weren’t told anything about what kind of pain – from what conditions – the study participants were experiencing. Point of clarification: It’s not clear that these participants were suffering from any kind of pain other than the shocks provided by the investigators. They’re described as “volunteers.” The story lists a news release as its source and it’s clear this was its only source. Feels like holiday-week filler material. No comparison was made with any other known method of pain relief. Then again, as already stated, we don’t know anything about the pain these study participants had, so the entire story is void of vital information. We’re going to rule this unsatisfactory because we’re not told what kind of music was used (couldn’t that be an important variable? ), nor for how long study participants were exposed, nor the setting (home? research setting?) – nothing that could address the potential availability of this approach. Music therapy has been studied for decades across a range of conditions. The story didn’t even acknowledge any past research in any other field. The story admits that an American Pain Society news release was its sole source.


Gaza runs out of coronavirus tests, Palestinian health officials say.

Explanation: The Gaza Strip has no more coronavirus test kits, Palestinian health officials said on Wednesday, amid fears of disaster if the illness spreads in the blockaded, densely packed enclave.

“Testing at our central laboratory has stopped, after coronavirus test kits completely ran out,” Gaza health ministry spokesman Ashraf al-Qidra said. The ministry is run by the enclave’s Islamist rulers, Hamas. The impoverished coastal strip has for years been under a blockade led by neighbouring Israel, which it says is needed to stop weapons and money reaching its enemy Hamas. Gaza has reported 13 cases of coronavirus infection, all of whom are at quarantine facilities. But officials have voiced concern that a shortage of critical equipment and medical supplies could set off a rapid spread amongst the enclave’s two million people. In a news briefing, Qidra said dozens of samples were awaiting testing, and that hundreds of people would likely have to remain in quarantine facilities as a result. He appealed to international organisations to provide Gaza with testing kits as well as 100 ventilators and 140 beds for intensive care units. Hamas has closed schools, mosques and wedding halls and banned large street gatherings to halt the contagion’s spread, but has not moved to impose a lockdown on Gaza’s 2 million residents, saying it was not yet necessary. Israel, which tightly controls movement in and out of Gaza, last week linked any coronavirus aid it might offer Palestinians there to progress in its attempt to recover two Israeli soldiers lost during the 2014 war in the enclave. Also last week, Norway, which chairs a major donor group to the Palestinians, pleaded for more funding for Gaza and the Israeli-occupied West Bank to help stave off a humanitarian disaster. One death and 250 cases have been reported amongst Palestinians in the West Bank, territory Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war and where the Palestinian Authority has limited self-rule.


In Early Trial, Targeted Therapy Fights Advanced Melanoma

Explanation: Importantly, it was the only story to explain that we don’t yet know whether the new drug prolongs the survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. Somewhat surprisingly given the story’s attention to these details, it failed to describe or make any attempt to quantify the potential harms of the new drug, which are not trivial. It also allowed an expert to extol the benefits of screening for skin cancer prevention when this approach is not clearly supported by the evidence. Messages promoting cancer screening are ubiquitous but not always evidence based. As one of our reviewers completed his work, New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft is urging women not to be afraid of false-positive mammograms during the halftime of a preseason football game. Journalists need to counter this knee-jerk advocacy with sober and balanced discussion of the benefits and risks.

The story didn’t mention costs, which is somewhat understandable given the early phase of research. But the competing USA Today story, while noting that drug pricing hasn’t been set, at least noted that many new cancer therapies "cost $5,000 to $7,000 a month." This story should have done something like that as well. The story does a good job of quantifying the benefits. It explained that 81% of patients had a partial response, meaning some shrinkage of the tumor, and gives the absolute number of people this represents. It also explains that the drug is effective in only the 50% of advanced melanoma patients with a specific genetic mutation. Although it cautions that a "sizable proportion" of patients developed resistance to the drug, we wish it had been a bit more precise in its characterization of this problem. There was no discussion of harms in this story — somewhat shocking when you consider that safety assessment is the primary objective of phase I research. The suggestion that this drug may substantially increase the risk of another, less invasive type of skin cancer, certainly warrants some attention. The accompanying editorial in the NEJM commented: "Overall, PLX4032 had moderate toxicity, with rash of grade 2 or 3, fatigue, and arthralgia being the major dose-limiting toxic effects. Somewhat unexpectedly, cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas developed in a significant percentage of patients." This story gave a lucid account of the research and communicated some of its key limitations. It noted that the dramatic results of this small study of very sick patients may not be generalizable to the broader population of individuals with melanoma. It also pointed out uncertainty regarding how long the drug will remain effective. No disease-mongering here. The story quotes a dermatologist with no links to the research. Not coincidentally, she is the only person in any of the three stories we reviewed about this study to point out the lack of conclusive data on survival. The story also notes that the trial was funded by drug maker Roche. The story notes that only about 15% of patients respond to the standard treatments for metastatic melanoma — chemotherapy and interleukin-2. But it veers into questionable territory when it allows an expert to claim that "the best defense against melanoma is to get your skin examined regularly by a professional who knows what to look for." In fact, recent guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force conclude that there is insufficient evidence to tell if regular screening helps prevent deaths from skin cancer. A thorough discussion of this issue would have included an opposing comment about the uncertainty of the evidence. The story specifies that the new drug is "experimental" and in phase 1 clinical research. Readers can conclude from this that the drug is not widely available. The story describes the research that led to the development of the new drug. By all accounts the drug does represent a novel and exciting approach to the treatment of metastatic melanoma. We feel pretty confident that this story didn’t rely on a news release.


Stem cells reverse blindness caused by burns

Explanation: The report glosses over remaining uncertainties about the technique and its potential risks. It neglects weaknesses in the trial design, including the absence of a control group, randomization or procedures to mitigate possible bias by evaluators. The reporter also failed to include the fact that some of the researchers have relationships with companies that may stand to benefit from commercialization of their technique. A lead sentence that calls an experimental treatment “a stunning success” can overwhelm details reported in the body of a story about uncertainties, limitations and remaining hurdles.

The technique is experimental; still it would have been helpful to offer some comparison between this technique and standard treatments. This story accurately and prominently reports that the treatment was considered successful for 82 out of 107 eyes treated. However, the story also includes enthusiast raves, including terming the results a “stunning success” and quoting an independent researcher who says the treatment is “a roaring success." The story does not mention the risk of infection from the procedure, the possibility of damage to the healthy eye used as a source of stem cells, or other potential harms from the procedure. This story notes that the trial involved just several dozen patients; however, it does not point out that there was no control group, that is, the patients who underwent the experimental procedure were not directly compared to similar patients who received either no treatment or an alternative therapy. Also, the story does not explain that this sort of trial, in which the researchers were obviously aware of which eyes had been treated, is less resistant to biased interpretation of the results than trials in which evaluators do not know which patients had received the experimental intervention. Although it is difficult to design a trial of this sort that uses a placebo or sham control, in part because it may be unethical to subject participants to a surgical procedure that isn’t actually intended to offer some benefit, the trial could have included independent evaluators who examined the eyes of people who had the procedure as well as others who had not been treated, without knowing which was which. The story could have done a better job reporting on the limitations of the findings. The story clearly points out that this blindness treatment is specifically applicable only to people with chemical burns to the surfaces of their eyes… and only in patients with enough healthy tissue to provide a source of stem cells to grow in culture and then graft onto the damaged area. Although the story includes two independent sources and notes that the trial was partially funded by the Italian government, it fails to point out that some of the study authors serve on the boards or consult with companies (Holostem Terapie Avanzate S.r.l and J-Tec L.t.d.) in the business of developing and marketing treatments using stem cells. These disclosures were included in the documents on the New England Journal of Medicine web site and should have been communicated to readers. The story does mention artificial corneas and cornea transplants from cadavers. However, it presents the alternatives as having inherent disadvantages without also noting that the treatment options have not been directly compared. And while this trial involved some participants who showed improvement with the new technique after not being helped by alternative procedures, the story should have indicated the success rate of alternative treatments for similar burns. This story makes clear that the technique is experimental and does not offer any predictions about when similar techniques might be widely available. But it would have been useful to indicate what hurdles stand between this step and regular clinical use. The statement that the stem cell transplants “offer hope to the thousands of people worldwide every year who suffer chemical burns on their corneas” encourages readers to believe that this experimental technique may be available soon. The story notes that this is a “relatively new use,” but readers may get the impression that this trial is the very first attempt to graft corneal stem cells. As the original journal article on the trial notes, the technique has been studied by others, though the authors wrote that this trial involved more participants and had longer follow-up. The story does not appear to be based largely on a news release.


Explanation: Getty Images This news release describes a small study (~50 subjects) from UT Southwestern Medical Center showing that fairly aggressive and regular exercise in sedentary, middle-aged individuals can marginally increase maximum oxygen uptake and moderately improve the elasticity of the main pumping chamber of the heart (left ventricle). Although the news release does a good job outlining the prescribed exercise regime, it makes unwarranted and confusing claims about reversing damage from “heart aging,” and suggesting the findings might “help prevent risk of future heart failure.” This language is not justified. The research can’t tell us if risk for heart failure has been reduced in these study participants. Nor does it establish what is meant by “heart aging” and how that has been “reversed” by the intervention. The news release would have been markedly improved if such terms had been dropped, and focused more on what is — and is not known — about poor fitness as a risk factor for heart failure. Cardiovascular health is a major health issue for middle-aged people and their health care providers. It makes research like this very interesting for readers, and we believe that places a premium on clear language. This study had little to do with “heart aging” or even heart failure. So using such language in both the news release title, as well as the opening paragraph, sets up readers to be misguided and misinformed.

The intervention proposed is at least a half-hour of exercise 4-5 times per week. With the exception of a recommended 1 or 2 sessions involving weights or exercise machines (which would involve some cost) this intervention would require minimal financial investment. We’ll rate this Not Applicable. The headline of the news release claims ‘Proper exercise can reverse damage from heart aging,’ but the study documents two outcomes: an ‘18% improvement’ in maximal oxygen uptake, and a ‘25% improvement’ in the elasticity of the left ventricle (the chamber primarily responsible for pumping oxygenated blood throughout the body). “Reversal” implies a return to a previous state of function, but this study merely documents improvement in two cardiovascular outcomes that are commonly seen with regular aerobic exercise. It’s not clear if this change does in fact represent a “reversal.” In addition, “damage from heart aging” is a confusing phrase. Poor oxygen uptake and a loss of heart elasticity are as much a consequence of sedentary lifestyle as they are a result of an aging heart. This is why a headline implying that exercise actually reverses aging in the heart is misleading. Finally, the first paragraph of the release claims that exercise can help prevent the risk of future heart failure, even though the study itself makes it clear this outcome is speculative. At the very least, the release should have cautioned that a much larger and longer study would be needed to document any impact on heart failure outcomes. The news release does an excellent job of outlining the exercise regime employed in the study. However, it does not mention that the study specifically recruited subjects between the ages of 45 – 64 who were sedentary. Given that one of the exercise sessions recommended in the study focuses on high-intensity interval training (HIIT) — and such training does come with potential risks for deconditioned individuals — it might have been advisable to mention that supervision for HIIT training should be strongly considered. There are three noteworthy limitations to this small, unblinded study that were not mentioned. First, and probably foremost, is that this study selectively chose volunteers who were willing to participate in the fairly intense exercise regimen. This significantly limits its applicability to the public at large. This was not mentioned in the news release. Secondly, this study could not draw conclusions regarding the impact of exercise on developing heart failure in the future. The news release erroneously implied it could. Third, the article clearly contends that the interventions provide a clinical benefit (“reverse damage to sedentary, aging hearts and help prevent risk of future heart failure”) while the study itself only documents improvements in what are essentially lab values: improvement in oxygen intake during exercise and improved left ventricular compliance (ie. elasticity). Whenever possible, news releases should make it clear how such values may or may not translate to outcomes that make a difference in people’s lives — such as living longer or better. This news release uses the term “heart aging” without explanation. It’s not clear what it means and it sounds vaguely worrisome, but we don’t think it rises to the level of disease mongering. The news release mentions the funding sources for the study (NIH and American Heart Association). There are no conflicts of interest listed in the news release or study. It’s not clear if there are any viable alternatives to exercise for the outcomes addressed in this study. The subjects selected for this study — if they, indeed, have less flexible left ventricles — are potentially comparable to patients with what is called ‘heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction (or, HFpEF; with ejection fracture being a way to measure the efficiency of the heart as a pump). The paper mentions the medication, spironolactone, as ‘the only treatment strategy recommended (class II recommendation) to counteract the debilitating effects of HFpEF.” The news release could have mentioned this alternative, but we won’t dock points for not doing so. We’ll rate it not applicable. The intervention in question here is aerobic exercise. Widely available. The news release mentions early research by cardiologists from the same institution documenting stiff left ventricles in middle-aged people who don’t exercise. It’s mentioned that this study is unique in asking the question: can exercise restore heart elasticity in previously sedentary, middle-aged people? We’ll rate this satisfactory. But really, this is just one of innumerable studies that show exercise is beneficial. It might be measuring the benefit in a novel way but, in the end, it is just suggesting that exercise is good. This is key problem posed by this news release: Implying that there is damage in an aging heart that can be reversed, without justifying the use of the word ‘reverse.’ Also, the phrase ‘heart aging’ does not come from the study, is not commonly used by either cardiologists or general practitioners, and is potentially misleading for readers.


New Mexico woman, 105, who beat 1918 flu, has COVID-19.

Explanation: A 105-year-old New Mexico woman who beat back the 1918 flu that killed millions, including her mother and infant sister, is battling COVID-19.

Virus Outbreak, Health, General News, Flu, New Mexico, U.S. News

The Gallup Independent reports  Lubica “Luby” Grenko, who will turn 106 years old in August, has been fighting the coronavirus since being diagnosed April 29 at the Little Sisters of the Poor in Gallup, New Mexico. The Gallup-born Grenko was born when World War I began, then she survived the 1918 flu before enduring the Great Depression and World War II. The flu took the lives of her mother, Marijeta Kauzlaric, 28, and younger sister, Annie Kauzlaric, 1 month old. Grenko’s granddaughter Misty Tolson says her grandmother remembers her mother going into the hospital and never coming out. Tolson says she doesn’t think her grandma understands the current virus because she told one of the aides who walked in with protective gear on, “What the heck do you have on?”


Chinese officials are seeking approval to start the mass killing of 20,000 people in order to stop the spread of new coronavirus.

Explanation: In other words, this website doesn’t exactly have a great track record of genuine news reporting.

On Feb. 5, 2020, the website AB-TC (aka City News) published an article that claimed Chinese officials were seeking approval from the Supreme People’s Court to start the mass killing of 20,000 people infected with the new coronavirus in an attempt to contain the disease:  China seek for court’s approval to kill the over 20,000 coronavirus patients to avoid further spread of the virus The highest level of court in Chhina [sic], Supreme People’s Court, is expected to give an approval on Friday for the mass killing of coronavirus patients in China as sure means of controlling the spread of the deadly virus. The State tells the court that China is on the verge of losing its health workers to Coronavirus as at least 20 health workers contract the virus daily. This is not a genuine news report. While the AB-TC website does not carry any disclaimers labeling its content as fiction, we found a number of red flags concerning the legitimacy of this outlet’s reporting. For starters, this website is full of junk news stories. For instance, a July 2010 article (still featured on the homepage) carries the headline, “BREAKING: New York Giants coach Pat Shurmur has died.” But Shurmur didn’t die in 2010. In fact, he is still alive as of this writing and was hired as the offensive coordinator for the Denver Broncos in January 2020. The website has also published hoax articles about “cannibal restaurants” (debunked here), death hoaxes about celebrity couples (debunked here), doctored tweets from U.S. President Donald Trump, and a junk news article that falsely claimed Prince Andrew had committed suicide. This website has also previously spread misinformation about the coronavirus, or 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease. The government of Singapore released a statement on Jan. 30, 2020, to refute claims published in an AB-TC report: Corrections and clarifications regarding falsehoods published by AB-TC City News’ website On 30 Jan 2020, a website called ‘City News’ published an article titled “BREAKING NEWS: Singapore records six more coronavirus case, total of 16 now” (https://ab-tc.com/singapore-coronavirus-cases/) claiming that five Singaporeans have contracted the Wuhan coronavirus without going to China. As of 9pm on 30 Jan 2020, there is no local transmission of the Wuhan virus in Singapore. All confirmed cases in Singapore to date are Chinese nationals who travelled from Wuhan. None of the AB-TC articles we examined was accompanied by a person’s byline. Rather, they were all written by so-called “local correspondents.”