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.
A video clip has resurfaced that features Dr. Anthony Fauci in a 2004 interview saying that a recent influenza infection provides sufficient protection to skip the flu shot. Vaccine opponents are using the clip to claim that reliance on “natural immunity” should apply to COVID-19 vaccines. COVID-19 and the flu are not the same disease and should not be treated as such. Health authorities recommend COVID-19 vaccination for people who have recovered from COVID-19 because the vaccine provides more reliable protection. Among people who have had COVID-19, those who are vaccinated are significantly less likely to be reinfected than those who remain unvaccinated.
Recommendation: 
A social media post with nearly 49,000 engagements falsely claims that people vaccinated against COVID-19 continue to get sick while unvaccinated people are “healthy and thriving.” While it’s true that the Omicron variant infected fully vaccinated people more than previous variants, unvaccinated people are still more susceptible to Omicron infections. Additionally, fully vaccinated people are far better protected against severe disease and death from Omicron than unvaccinated people. Boosters further increase that protection.
Recommendation:
A drummer in an American rock band died suddenly at age 50 after being admitted to the hospital with chest pains. Immediately after the death was reported, vaccine opponents began attributing the musician’s cause of death to myocarditis related to the COVID-19 vaccine. No cause of death has not been reported. There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccination is related to the musician’s death.
Recommendation:
Vaccine opponents are misrepresenting a recent study that assessed a group of 15 children who were diagnosed with myopericarditis (inflammation of heart muscles) after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. Of the 15 patients, 10 had abnormal cardiac activity when evaluated. A physician with a large online following who has previously spread vaccine misinformation posted that 63 percent of children in the study experienced the abnormality without clarifying that the study only included a small group of children experiencing a rare vaccine side effect. The post also fails to mention that all of the children improved quickly after receiving treatment.
Recommendation: 
A widely shared social media post falsely claims that the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial and approval process was rushed, suggesting that there was not enough data to determine if the vaccines were safe and effective. The post has garnered nearly 35,000 engagements in just a few days. It is true that COVID-19 vaccines were developed on an unprecedentedly short timeline. However, that is not a sign of poor or “rushed” science, but rather a culmination of decades of scientific advancements. The vaccines were able to be developed in under a year because researchers were building on in-depth knowledge of coronaviruses, decades of mRNA research, and historic global collaboration and funding.
Recommendation:
Several social media posts and conspiracy news articles are claiming that a new study proves that the pharmaceutical company Moderna created SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The claim has been disputed by the study’s author, an ophthalmologist with no background in vaccine or immunology research, who says the study was an investigation into the origin of the virus and didn’t implicate Moderna. Multiple independent experts in the field have questioned the quality and validity of the study and its findings.
Recommendation: 
A video making the rounds on social media in the Philippines falsely claims that the anti-parasitic medication ivermectin is an effective alternative to the COVID-19 vaccine. The video was posted by an anti-abortion account and appears to suggest that people opposed to abortion may want to avoid the COVID-19 vaccine, likely due to the myth that the vaccines contain fetal tissue. There is no evidence that ivermectin can effectively prevent or treat COVID-19. A recent study found that ivermectin was no more effective than placebo at preventing hospitalization in COVID-19 patients.
Recommendation:
An article that is trending on conservative social media falsely claims that VAERS data shows that there have been more military deaths caused by COVID-19 vaccines than from COVID-19. No evidence is provided to support the claim, and it’s unclear how VAERS reports specifically linked to service members would even be identified. According to the Department of Defense, COVID-19 has killed 682 members of the U.S. military.
Recommendation:
A social media post has garnered nearly 19,000 engagements by listing thousands of supposed “COVID-19 vaccine injuries,” which were pulled from VAERS. Responses to the post question the safety of the vaccine, with many misrepresenting VAERS data. As the VAERS website explains, the reports in the database are explicitly not a list of vaccine injuries. VAERS reports can be submitted by anyone and are unverified. VAERS is designed to be used by researchers to flag potential safety concerns, not to determine the safety of a particular vaccine.
Recommendation:
A website known for publishing anti-vaccine content posted an article accusing the federal government of secretly paying media outlets to promote COVID-19 vaccines and suppress negative coverage of the vaccine. This claim is false. The White House and the Department of Health and Human Services launched a public education ad campaign to encourage vaccination. Funding for the campaign was approved by Congress and the ads were produced independently of the media outlets that aired them. Public service campaigns of this type that encourage healthy behaviors, such as annual flu shots and regular skin cancer screenings, are common.
Recommendation:
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.
Vaccine Misinformation Guide
Get practical tips for addressing misinformation in this new guide. Click image to download, or see highlights.