Fact-checkers and Big Tech lost another round with purported COVID-19 misinformation this week, when an American Heart Association journal published research suggesting the spike protein used in mRNA vaccines can harm some people.
The peer-reviewed study in Circulation reviewed 16 adolescents and young adults hospitalized at Massachusetts General Hospital or Boston Children’s with post-vaccination myocarditis from January 2021-February 2022. All had “markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein” in their blood, “unbounded by antibodies.”
Allegations that “masks work” and “don’t cause harm” have been enforced by governments and corporations around the world for more than 18 months through arrests, firings, censorship, fines, and denial of access to schools, supermarkets, hospitals, streets, and other public spaces. This has made it virtually impossible for many people to live without complying with mask mandates.
In recent weeks, however, more medical scholars and media outlets are coming to grips with facts about masks that Just Facts has been documenting for more than a year and painstakingly compiled in a September 2021 article sourced with more than 50 peer-reviewed science journals. Here’s a sample of people who are speaking up about the facts and their implications:
Dr. Vinay Prasad—an associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of California, San Francisco—has written an article that examines the scientific evidence for masking children and concludes that:
This month the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Sixth Assessment Report. As with the previous five reports, it is bursting with dire “projections” about the future of the planet and civilization (they never say “predictions” because there is always some accountability and embarrassment when a prediction turns out to be wrong).
I’m no climate scientist, so I can’t claim to hold a research-based opinion on “global climate change,” as it is now known. But I remember exactly when I started taking the “projections” of bodies like the IPCC with a grain of salt. It was when the “Climategate” scandal came to light in 2009, in which a hacked server resulted in a leak of internal emails from climate scientists at the prestigious Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in Great Britain.
The leaked emails clearly showed that researchers were withholding important information from the public—information that would undermine the apocalyptic claims of climate scientists. For example, illustrious expert Kevin Trenberth acknowledged to his colleagues that “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty.” But rather than admit this uncertainty, researchers colluded to “hide the decline” from the public.
A fact-checker’s role is to help readers distinguish fact from fiction by analyzing and rating claims. Sometimes, however, fact-checkers seem to create and check claims that no one is making, or, perhaps inadvertently, blame outlets or individuals for false claims that they didn’t make.
In a fact-check published Jan. 5, Snopes contributor Madison Dapcevich analyzed the claim “Legislation proposed in the New York State Senate in 2021 called for the establishment of COVID-19 ‘detention camps,’” rating this a “Mixture” of truth and falsehood.
A “fact check” by USA Today is defaming a Ph.D.-vetted study by Just Facts that found non-citizens may have cast enough illegal votes for Joe Biden to overturn the lawful election results in some key battleground states. The article, written by USA Today’s Chelsey Cox, contains 10 misrepresentations, unsupported claims, half-truths, and outright falsehoods.
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s spokesperson stated that a viral post alleging that a 118-year-old man voted was true, but was probably due to a mistyped entry. Fact-checkers said that they discovered another individual with the same name in the area.
The post featured a screen recording: an individual typed in “William Bradley” into the state’s voter information page, followed by a birth date and zip code. Immediately, the search returned with Bradley’s city clerk information as well as a confirmation that an absentee ballot had been received.
We live in an age in which information is far more accessible than ever before in human history. However, so is misinformation. How can we sort out one from other?
Well, some people who call themselves “fact checkers” claim to have the answer. They say, “Trust us.” But all-too-often, they fail to get even basic facts correct. Let’s look at three prime examples. See if you notice a common thread between them.
by George Rasley One of the more interesting phenomena of the internet age is the rise of self-appointed Leftwing “fact checkers” who have created a cottage industry of undermining straight news reporting critical of Democrats and Leftist causes. One of the more prominent examples of this phenomena is Snopes.com,…