Misinformation Alerts
Knowing what misinformation is being shared can help you generate effective messaging.
These insights are based on a combination of automated media monitoring and manual review by public health data analysts. Media data are publicly available data from many sources, such as social media, broadcast television, newspapers and magazines, news websites, online video, blogs, and more. Analysts from the Public Good Projects triangulate this data along with other data from fact checking organizations and investigative sources to provide an accurate, but not exhaustive, list of currently circulating misinformation.Misinformation Alerts
Knowing what misinformation is being shared can help you generate effective messaging.
These insights are based on a combination of automated media monitoring and manual review by public health data analysts. Media data are publicly available data from many sources, such as social media, broadcast television, newspapers and magazines, news websites, online video, blogs, and more. Analysts from the Public Good Projects triangulate this data along with other data from fact checking organizations and investigative sources to provide an accurate, but not exhaustive, list of currently circulating misinformation.Alerts are categorized as high, medium, and low risk.
- High risk alerts: Narratives with widespread circulation across communities, high engagement, exponential velocity, and a high potential to impact health decisions. Are often more memorable than accurate information.
- Medium risk alerts: Narratives that are circulating in priority populations and pose some threat to health. Potential for further spread due to the tactics used or because of predicted velocity. Often highlights the questions and concerns of people.
- Low risk alerts: Narratives that are limited in reach, don’t impact your community, or lack the qualities necessary for future spread. May indicate information gaps, confusion, or concerns.
An image carousel posted on social media promotes the myth that millions of Americans received polio vaccines contaminated with a cancer-causing SV40 virus.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
The persistence of this misinformation increases its risk. Some early batches of the polio vaccine were contaminated with SV40. The virus can cause cancer in rodents, but there is no evidence that it causes cancer in humans. No polio vaccine administered since 1963 has contained SV40 contamination. Messaging may continue to emphasize key talking points: The polio vaccine is safe and the only way to eradicate polio. Fact Checking Source(s): Health Feedback, FactCheck.org
Images of health insurer incentive programs for providers to encourage their patients to get COVID-19 vaccines are circulating again. A sitting U.S. congressman who has promoted vaccine misinformation in the past shared the image with the claim that insurance companies are bribing doctors to vaccinate patients.
Recommendation:
High Risk Read More +
The high-profile nature of this misinformation and its potential to increase vaccine hesitancy elevates its risk. Debunking messaging may explain that insurance incentive programs require doctors to meet a variety of performance goals related to the quality of patient care and health outcomes. The performance metrics include timely vaccinations, regular appointments, appropriate use of medications, disease diagnosis, and treatment. Insurance companies have a financial interest in covered patients being as healthy as possible. Messaging may also emphasize that vaccinations are integral to health care that reduce the risk of patients contracting serious and potentially fatal illnesses. Fact-Checking Source(s):
A widely shared post is recirculating the long-disproven claim that mRNA vaccines alter human genomes. The post also repeats the false claim that mRNA vaccines will soon be added to the food supply.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
These false claims about mRNA vaccines are persistent and widespread, which raises their risk. Debunking messaging may explain that the mRNA in vaccines can not enter the cell nucleus and does not interact with or alter genetic material in any way. The safety of COVID-19 vaccines has been rigorously studied in millions of people worldwide for over three years with no evidence of widespread health issues. Emphasizing that there are no plans to put vaccines in food or use vaccinated or genetically engineered livestock to deliver vaccines is recommended. Prebunking messaging may also explain that vaccines have been used for decades to prevent the spread of devastating infectious diseases in livestock. These vaccines are not transmitted through meat or dairy products. Fact Checking Source(s): AP News, Reuters, AFP
A far-right news site claims that the CDC Foundation funds organizations to target doctors who promote vaccine misinformation to be mass reported and stripped of their medical license.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
The organizations in question use fact-based analysis to debunk vaccine misinformation, which may result in misinformation content being flagged or removed by social media platforms. Messaging may emphasize that doctors who circulate misinformation are not exempt from fact checking. It’s up to their licensing boards to determine if their conduct warrants a suspension of their medical license. Fact Checking Source(s): Becker Hospital Review, AMA, PolitiFact
An anti-vaccine social media account claims that medical professionals falsely classify deaths caused by routine vaccines as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The account shared the story of a child who allegedly died within hours of receiving several vaccinations.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
The persistence of this misinformation increases its risk. Debunking messaging may explain that there is no link between vaccines and SIDS. The condition’s exact cause is unknown, but numerous studies have shown that SIDS occurs at the same rate in vaccinated and unvaccinated children and has not increased with higher vaccination rates. Anti-vaccine groups have attempted for decades to falsely link various childhood vaccines to sudden infant death syndrome, despite evidence conclusively showing no link between the condition and any vaccine. Fact Checking Source(s): Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, CDC
A U.K.-based oncologist with a large following claims in a recent article that COVID-19 boosters cause more harm than good. He also falsely claims that the COVID-19 vaccines caused widespread injuries based on reports to Yellow Card, an adverse event reporting system similar to VAERS in the U.S. Finally, he repeats the myth that COVID-19 vaccines impair the immune system and increase cancer risk.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
The high-profile nature of the misinformation source increases its risk. Debunking messaging may explain that there is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines or boosters cause widespread health issues. Unverified reports of vaccine injuries do not disprove what two and a half years of large-scale studies have demonstrated: There is no link between COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of cancer or other serious health conditions. Vaccines and boosters don’t weaken the immune system; they strengthen its ability to fight COVID-19. Fact Checking Source(s): NIH, Reuters, Health Feedback, AP
A social media post dredged up a two-decade-old conspiracy theory that the CDC covered up data showing a link between thimerosal in certain vaccines and developmental delays and autism in children. The claim is based on an image of an abstract from a “study” that found a correlation between higher doses of thimerosal and an increased rate of attention deficit disorder, tics, and speech delays in children.
Recommendation:
High Risk Read More +
The persistence of the misinformation increases its risk. Debunking messaging may explain that the study in question is not actually a study but an abstract of preliminary, non-peer reviewed data presented at a conference in 2000. Far from being concealed, the full transcript of the presentation is available online. During the presentation, the lead researcher explained that there were irregularities in data collection, including inconsistencies in age at vaccination and the types and combination of vaccines the children received. Emphasizing that, even at this early stage, the data showed no link between thimerosal exposure and autism is recommended. Three years after the conference, the full study was published in a peer-reviewed journal and found no link between thimerosal-containing vaccines and any developmental disorders. Prebunking messaging may also emphasize that no childhood vaccine in use since 2001 contains thimerosal. Fact-Checking Source(s):
Several popular anti-vaccine social media accounts and blogs are circulating the false claim that mRNA vaccines are or soon will be in the food supply through vaccinated or genetically engineered livestock. One article claims that mRNA vaccines will be added to food this month. These claims are based on three studies: a 2013 Indian review—incorrectly identified as an “NIH study”—that discusses the possibility of edible vaccines, a 2021 American study exploring the use of plants to produce mRNA vaccines, and a recent Chinese study that used vessels made from milk protein to deliver an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to mice. The National Cattlemen's Beef Association released a statement in response to the false claims clarifying that no mRNA vaccines are in cattle.
Recommendation:
Medium Risk Read More +
The persistence and widespread nature of the claim elevates its risk. Some variation of this claim has emerged every few months for the last two years. The claims diminish after being debunked, only to resurface later with slight alterations. Emphasizing that none of the referenced studies have anything to do with putting vaccines in food or the use of vaccinated or genetically engineered livestock is recommended, as is explaining that these studies are simply exploring more cost-effective and practical ways to produce and deliver vaccines. Prebunking messaging may explain that vaccines have been used for decades to prevent the spread of devastating infectious diseases in livestock. These vaccines are not transmitted through meat or dairy products. Fact Checking Source(s): USA Today
A video trending online features a mother who believes her child’s death is due to injuries related to hepatitis B vaccination. The baby’s official cause of death is SIDS, but the mother claims that an independent autopsy proved the vaccine was responsible for her child’s death.
Recommendation:
High Risk Read More +
The emotional nature of the story and widespread misinformation about the hepatitis B vaccine elevates its risk. While any death is tragic, there is no evidence that the vaccine was related to the infant’s death. Responding with empathy and acknowledging the concerns of parents is recommended, as is explaining the importance of the hepatitis B vaccine to protect infants. Prebunking messaging may explain that the vaccine is given at birth to prevent transmission of the virus from mother to child. Additionally, most people who have hepatitis are not aware of it, and infants can be exposed to the virus by other loved ones who come in contact with the baby. Messaging may also emphasize that the hepatitis B vaccine is one of the safest vaccines available, with an extremely low risk of serious side effects. Fact-Checking Source(s):
A website that claims vaccines don’t save lives is promoting misinformation about the safety of the HPV vaccine. The website shares the story of a U.K. woman who has claimed for years that the HPV vaccine is responsible for a growing list of chronic illnesses, including an allergy to her own tears. The story also falsely claims that the HPV vaccine only lasts for three years and isn’t effective against cervical cancer.
Recommendation:
High Risk Read More +
Public Health England has stated that it investigates every report of vaccine side effects and has found “no credible evidence of a link between the HPV vaccine and a range of chronic illnesses.” Debunking messaging may explain that the HPV vaccine provides long-lasting protection against the HPV strains that cause 70 percent of cervical cancers. Messaging may also emphasize that, in the 17 years since the HPV vaccine’s approval, no serious safety concerns have been reported. Emphasizing that a recent U.K. study found an 87 percent reduction in cervical cancer among women who were vaccinated at age 12 is recommended. Fact-Checking Source(s):
Alerts are categorized as high, medium, and low risk.
- High risk alerts: Narratives with widespread circulation across communities, high engagement, exponential velocity, and a high potential to impact health decisions. Are often more memorable than accurate information.
- Medium risk alerts: Narratives that are circulating in priority populations and pose some threat to health. Potential for further spread due to the tactics used or because of predicted velocity. Often highlights the questions and concerns of people.
- Low risk alerts: Narratives that are limited in reach, don’t impact your community, or lack the qualities necessary for future spread. May indicate information gaps, confusion, or concerns.
Vaccine Misinformation Guide
Get practical tips for addressing misinformation in this new guide. Click image to download, or see highlights.