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.
Multiple trending articles are misusing data from the U.K. Health Security Agency to claim that more vaccinated than unvaccinated people are getting and dying from COVID-19. This misleading claim has been repeated for months and overlooks the fact that the vaccinated population is three times the size of the unvaccinated population in the U.K. The total number of cases and deaths may be higher among vaccinated people, but unvaccinated people are more likely to contract COVID-19 and are at a much higher risk of becoming seriously ill or dying from COVID-19.
Recommendation:
Direct Response Read More +
Bad actors online are increasingly misrepresenting data in order to cast doubt on vaccines in the third year of the pandemic. Explaining that as vaccination rates climb, vaccinated people make up a larger proportion of infections and deaths is recommended. For example, if 100 percent of a population is vaccinated then 100 percent of deaths will be in people who are fully vaccinated. That tells us nothing about how effective a vaccine is. When the data is broken down by age and other demographics, it becomes clear that vaccinated people are better protected against infection and serious illness than unvaccinated people. Fact-Checking Source(s):
A popular anti-vaccine website that has repeatedly misrepresented VAERS data to discourage vaccination is now attempting to dispute the fact that VAERS data is being misused by vaccine opponents. An article posted to the site falsely claims that fact-checkers dismiss VAERS data as “unreliable” and “useless.” VAERS data is not unreliable when it is used for its intended purpose. However, the data is frequently used without appropriate context to draw conclusions about the safety of specific vaccines. The misleading use of VAERS data by sites like the one that posted the article is the reason that fact-checkers caution against reliance on VAERS.
Recommendation:
Direct Response Read More +
VAERS or other vaccine safety monitoring systems are often used incorrectly, sometimes deliberately, in order to spread misinformation and disinformation. VAERS and similar systems allow anyone to submit reports of vaccine injury or side effects; these claims do not have to be verified. After claims are made, government health experts perform investigations to determine whether reported injuries or side effects were due to vaccines. This is why only official government reports and peer-reviewed scientific studies should be trusted. Emphasizing that these reporting systems contain unverified reports while directing to actual evidence is recommended, as is continuing to explain what mild side effects people can expect after vaccination. Fact-Checking Source(s):
The false claim that COVID-19 vaccines cause syphilis is circulating on social media. The misinformation is linked to an FDA letter notifying health care workers about the possibility of a specific syphilis test giving false-positive results for people vaccinated against COVID-19. False positives from the test have also been reported following other routine vaccinations and in people who are pregnant and have infections like tuberculosis. The letter clearly states that “COVID-19 vaccines do not cause syphilis.” The false claim has been shared across social media, where it has gotten thousands of engagements.
Recommendation: Ignore Read More +
A new study that is still in peer review found that the low-dose Pfizer vaccine for children 5 to 11 offered little protection against Omicron infection and decreased protection against serious illness. The study has been covered by multiple major news sites and has been shared on social media with messages discouraging parents from vaccinating their children.
Recommendation:
Direct Response Read More +
There is understandable and widespread concern about COVID-19 vaccination for children. Responding with empathy and acknowledging the concerns of parents is recommended, as is explaining how vaccination will help protect both children and their families. Informational materials may emphasize that the latest news around vaccine efficacy in the 5 to 11 age group is not a sign that the vaccine is unnecessary for children but rather that the low-dose vaccine was likely not sufficient to provide lasting immunity. An additional or alternative vaccine dose for young children may be necessary. In the meantime, masks provide young children with additional protection against COVID-19. Fact-Checking Source(s):
A misleading graphic that is circulating online falsely claims that COVID-19 vaccines had no effect on overall mortality in the U.S. The claim ignores that vaccinated people have had dramatically lower death rates from COVID-19 than unvaccinated people. High COVID-19 mortality has been driven almost entirely by those who are unvaccinated.
Recommendation:
Passive Response Read More +
There is widespread confusion over the efficacy of vaccines and the rate at which they protect against hospitalization and death. Consider countering this misinformation by emphasizing that COVID-19 vaccines remain the best form of protection against the virus and that vaccination and booster doses substantially decrease the risk of death from COVID-19. In early December 2021, for example, unvaccinated adults were about 97 times more likely to die from COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people who had received boosters. Fact Checking Source(s):
A document is circulating on social media falsely claiming to be a nine-page list of Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine side effects. The document is part of a Pfizer report that was required for FDA approval. The report recorded 42,086 self-reported adverse events—more than half of which were not medically confirmed—out of over 155 million vaccine doses. The data presented in the report cannot be used to determine if the adverse events were caused by the vaccine. Additionally, the reported adverse events are listed in a single table with the remainder of the nine pages outlining potential adverse events that should be watched for.
Recommendation:
Passive Response Read More +
Vaccine safety monitoring systems are often used incorrectly, sometimes deliberately in order to spread misinformation and disinformation. VAERS and similar systems allow anyone to submit reports of vaccine injury or side effects; these claims do not have to be verified. After claims are made, government health experts perform investigations to determine whether reported injuries or side effects were due to vaccines. This is why only official government reports and peer-reviewed scientific studies should be trusted. Emphasizing that these reporting systems contain unverified reports while directing to actual evidence is recommended, as is continuing to explain what mild side effects people can expect after vaccination. Fact Checking Source(s):
An article on a U.K. conspiracy website misrepresents a Health Security Agency report, claiming that 90 percent of COVID-19 deaths in England were fully vaccinated. The article does not take into account that the most vaccinated group in the U.K. is the elderly, who are also most at risk of dying from COVID-19. More than 95 percent of U.K. residents aged 65 or older and 100 percent of those in their 70s are fully vaccinated.
Recommendation:
Direct Response Read More +
Bad actors online are increasingly misrepresenting data in order to cast doubt on vaccines in the third year of the pandemic. Explaining that as vaccination rates climb, vaccinated people make up a larger proportion of infections and deaths is recommended. For example, if 100 percent of a population is vaccinated then 100 percent of deaths will be in people who are fully vaccinated. That tells us nothing about how effective a vaccine is. When the data is broken down by age and other demographics, it becomes clear that vaccinated people are better protected against infection and serious illness than unvaccinated people. Fact-Checking Source(s):
An article on an anti-vaccine website misrepresented the findings of a recent case study that describes the autopsy results of two teen boys who died shortly after receiving the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. The article falsely claims that the report conclusively proves that the teens’ deaths resulted from vaccine-related myocarditis. The purpose of the report was to add to existing knowledge about suspected myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination so that doctors are better able to recognize and treat it. The evidence presented in the report does not support the conclusion that the deaths were caused by the vaccine. Overwhelming evidence shows that vaccines are safe and effective for adolescents and the risk of serious adverse events like myocarditis is much smaller than the risk of serious COVID-19 infection in the age group.
Recommendation:
Direct Response Read More +
There is understandable concern over whether vaccination is safe for children and teenagers. Responding with empathy and acknowledging the concerns of parents is recommended, as is explaining how vaccination will help protect both young people and their families. Informational materials may also emphasize that vaccines have been rigorously tested to make sure that they are safe for all vaccinated individuals, including those under 18, and that adverse side effects are extremely rare. Reminding people that millions have died from COVID-19 and that the vaccines are our best way to keep more people from dying is also recommended, as is explaining that a child is at a much higher risk of myocarditis from a COVID-19 infection than they are from the vaccine. Fact-Checking Source(s):
A conspiracy website published an investigative piece that claims to prove that mRNA vaccine causes AIDS. Although the article is simply rehashing several debunked myths about COVID-19 vaccines, it has been trending online for the past week. There is no evidence to support the article’s false claims that COVID-19 vaccines weaken the immune system, increase the risk of HIV infection, or cause so-called “vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.”
Recommendation: Passive Response Read More +
Posts are circulating online falsely claiming that the CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics are changing child development milestones to account for developmental delays that resulted from young children and adult educators and caretakers wearing masks. The developmental milestones are routinely reviewed and updated when necessary. The latest update was based on data gathered through March 2019, months before COVID-19 was discovered and a full year before masks were in widespread use in the U.S.
Recommendation:
Ignore Read More +
Responding to each piece of misinformation may detract from priority talking points. Fact-checking sources:
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.