495 claim verifications avg. score 4.3/10 139 rated true or mostly true 355 rated false or misleading
“The MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine causes autism in children.”
This claim is false. The sole study linking MMR to autism (Wakefield, 1998) was retracted by The Lancet for deliberate fraud. Since then, overwhelming scientific evidence — including WHO's 2025 review of 31 studies, a Cochrane review of 23 million children, and a meta-analysis of 1.25 million children — consistently finds no causal link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Every major health authority (WHO, AAP, National Academies) confirms vaccines do not cause autism.
“Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) significantly increases cancer risk in all women.”
This claim is false. HRT does not significantly increase cancer risk in all women. The evidence shows risk varies greatly by HRT type, duration, age, and individual health history. Estrogen-only HRT does not increase breast cancer risk and may lower it in some groups. Combined HRT modestly increases breast cancer risk (~5 extra cases per 1,000 women). Ovarian cancer risk increases are small and diminishing. In February 2026, the FDA removed blanket breast cancer warnings from HRT labels, reflecting that risks are individualized, not universal.
“Cadbury is selling 'Eid Eggs' in UK supermarkets to celebrate Eid al-Fitr.”
Cadbury is not selling "Eid Eggs" in UK supermarkets. The viral image is fabricated misinformation. Multiple independent fact-checkers (Full Fact, Snopes, The Journal) confirmed in February 2026 that the product does not exist. Cadbury's parent company Mondelēz International explicitly denied it. The social media account that originated the claim included "Semper parodius" (mock Latin for "Always Parody") in its profile. Cadbury's actual 2026 seasonal lineup includes only Easter-themed products.
“In China, Buddhist monks are required to obtain government permission in order to reincarnate.”
There is a real Chinese law (2007 Order No. 5) requiring government approval for the recognition of reincarnated "Living Buddhas" (tulkus) in Tibetan Buddhism — but the claim overstates it in two important ways. First, it applies only to Tibetan Buddhist tulku lineages, not all Buddhist monks in China. Second, the law governs the official recognition and management of reincarnation successions, not literal permission for a person to be reborn. The underlying regulation is genuine and enforceable, but the claim's broad wording gives a materially misleading impression.
“Failure by police to read Miranda rights does not invalidate an arrest.”
This claim is accurate. Under U.S. law, Miranda warnings are required before custodial interrogation, not as a condition of a lawful arrest. If police fail to read Miranda rights, the arrest itself remains valid as long as it was supported by probable cause. The consequence of a Miranda violation is typically suppression of unwarned statements, not invalidation of the arrest. However, suppression of key evidence can sometimes weaken the prosecution's case and may indirectly lead to reduced charges or dismissal.
“A single day on Venus is longer than a year on Venus.”
This claim is accurate under the standard definition used by NASA and other major space agencies: Venus's sidereal day (one full axial rotation) takes ~243 Earth days, while its orbital year takes only ~224.7 Earth days. However, the claim omits an important nuance: Venus's solar day (sunrise to sunrise) is only ~116.75 Earth days — shorter than its year — due to Venus's retrograde rotation. The unqualified word "day" creates ambiguity, but the dominant scientific framing supports the claim.
“It is possible for a person to fully function on 5 hours of sleep per night if they train their body.”
This claim is false. Major health authorities (AASM, CDC, NIH) agree that most adults need at least 7 hours of sleep and cannot train themselves to need less. While a rare genetic mutation allows under 1% of people to function on 4–6 hours, this is an inborn trait — not something achievable through training. Research shows that people who chronically sleep only 5 hours experience measurable cognitive and health impairments, even when they believe they've adapted.
“Cold plunges increase testosterone levels in men.”
This claim is not supported by the scientific evidence. The highest-quality peer-reviewed studies show cold-water immersion either blunts or decreases testosterone levels in men. The only sources supporting the claim are commercial cold plunge and cryotherapy vendors with clear financial conflicts of interest, and even one of those admits no definitive clinical trial exists. Any reported increases are trivially small (~5%), transient, and within normal hormonal fluctuation — not meaningful testosterone boosts.
“The Born In America Act prevents naturalized citizens from holding public office in the United States.”
No enacted law called the "Born in America Act" prevents naturalized citizens from holding public office. The viral claim that the U.S. Senate passed such legislation was debunked as fabricated (Snopes, November 2025). Under the Constitution, naturalized citizens are eligible for most federal offices, including Congress. Only the presidency requires "natural born" citizen status. This claim is false.
“Adopting an intentionally optimistic mindset, often referred to as 'delulu', increases self-confidence.”
While research shows optimism correlates with self-confidence and well-being, no peer-reviewed study has tested whether intentionally adopting a "delulu" mindset causes increased self-confidence. The claim conflates a loosely defined internet slang term with studied psychological constructs like optimism, treats correlation as causation, and omits evidence that excessive or unrealistic optimism can lead to poor decision-making and burnout. The core idea has a grain of truth, but the claim as stated significantly overstates what the evidence supports.
“Algorithm-driven recommendation systems amplify extreme viewpoints more than moderate ones.”
This claim overgeneralizes from mixed evidence. Some audits find YouTube's algorithm can elevate extreme content under specific conditions, but large-scale experiments show limited real-world effects on user opinions, and platforms like Reddit and Gab show no such amplification. The highest-quality research indicates that user choice—not algorithms alone—is often the primary driver of exposure to extreme content, and recommender systems can actually deamplify niche material when users don't engage with it. The claim is partially true but misleadingly broad.
“False claims are more likely to go viral on social media than fact-based corrections.”
This claim captures a real pattern — the landmark 2018 MIT/Science study found false news spreads faster and farther than true news on Twitter. However, the claim specifically compares false claims to "fact-based corrections," which is a narrower comparison the primary evidence doesn't directly test. At least one peer-reviewed study found that conclusively true fact-checks can be shared even more than extreme falsehoods. The claim is directionally right in many contexts but overgeneralizes into a universal rule, ignoring that correction effectiveness varies by platform, design, and topic.
“AI chatbots frequently repeat medical misinformation when prompted with misleading health claims.”
Multiple peer-reviewed studies confirm that AI chatbots often repeat and even elaborate on medical misinformation when prompted with misleading health claims. A Mount Sinai study found chatbots confidently explained fabricated conditions, and an Annals of Internal Medicine study reported 88% false responses to misleading prompts. However, the claim overgeneralizes: performance varies significantly by model, with some chatbots consistently refusing to generate false health information. The most dramatic findings also come from adversarial experimental setups rather than typical real-world usage.
“More than 30% of code written in 2026 is generated by AI tools.”
The claim that more than 30% of code written in 2026 is generated by AI tools is not supported by the strongest available evidence. The largest empirical study — covering 4.2 million developers from November 2025 through February 2026 — found AI-authored production code at 26.9%, below the 30% threshold. Higher estimates (41–42%) come from surveys that conflate "AI-assisted" with "AI-generated" code, inflating the figure. While AI coding tool adoption is widespread, usage rates do not equate to code generation share.
“Detox diets remove measurable toxins from the human body beyond what the liver and kidneys naturally eliminate.”
This claim is not supported by the weight of scientific evidence. Major health institutions — including the NCCIH, MD Anderson, UChicago Medicine, and Harvard Health — consistently conclude there is no compelling, high-quality evidence that detox diets remove measurable toxins beyond what the liver and kidneys naturally eliminate. The one supportive study measured trace elements in hair (an indirect, contamination-prone proxy) and itself acknowledged the broader lack of evidence. The human body's own organs already perform continuous detoxification, and no well-designed clinical trial has shown detox diets provide additional toxin removal.
“Parasitic infections are a common cause of sugar cravings in otherwise healthy adults.”
This claim is not supported by credible evidence. No peer-reviewed studies link parasitic infections to sugar cravings in healthy adults. The CDC does not list sugar cravings as a parasitic symptom, and a PubMed search returns zero direct evidence for this connection. The only sources asserting this link are low-credibility wellness blogs and holistic clinic websites citing no clinical research. Well-established causes of sugar cravings include stress, sleep deprivation, hormonal fluctuations, and dietary patterns.
“As of March 1, 2026, renewable energy sources are more expensive per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels in most major economies.”
This claim is false. As of early 2026, authoritative data from IRENA, BloombergNEF, and Lazard consistently show that renewable energy — particularly onshore wind (~$0.034/kWh) and solar PV (~$0.043/kWh) — is cheaper per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels ($0.08–$0.17/kWh) for new electricity generation in most major economies. IRENA reports that 91% of newly commissioned utility-scale renewable projects undercut the cheapest fossil fuel alternatives. The claim inverts the actual cost relationship.
“More than 50% of content engagement on major social media platforms is generated by bots rather than humans as of March 1, 2026.”
This claim is false. It conflates overall internet traffic — where bots may account for ~51% — with content engagement on social media platforms, which is a fundamentally different metric. The best direct evidence, a peer-reviewed study, finds only about 20% of social media activity is bot-generated. Even the highest platform-specific figure cited (40% of Facebook posts being machine-generated) measures posting volume, not engagement, and still falls short of 50%. No credible source supports the claim that bots generate more than half of social media engagement.
“Opening windows for 10–15 minutes daily removes harmful toxins from indoor air.”
The claim has a kernel of truth — CDC, EPA, and WHO all recommend opening windows as part of improving indoor air quality. However, the claim is misleading as stated. The mechanism is dilution, not "removal" of toxins. The 10–15 minute timeframe is not validated as universally sufficient by top-tier health authorities. And critically, in urban or high-pollution areas, opening windows can actually introduce more harmful pollutants than it clears. The practice works under favorable conditions but fails as a universal rule.
“Practicing bedtime stacking, which involves engaging in activities such as reading, journaling, or self-care in bed before sleep, improves sleep quality compared to using the bed only for sleep.”
This claim is not supported by the available evidence. Mainstream sleep medicine — including CBT-I stimulus control protocols and guidance from Harvard Health, the Cleveland Clinic, and the American Academy of Sleep Medicine — explicitly recommends reserving the bed for sleep (and sex) only, warning that in-bed activities like reading or journaling can condition wakefulness and worsen sleep quality. No rigorous study in the evidence base compares "bedtime stacking" in bed against a bed-only-for-sleep approach and finds it superior.