Category: Fact Checking

Childbirth, by all accounts, can be an arduous experience. For centuries, medical interventions and inventions have sought to make the birthing experience less painful, less dangerous and less fatal. 

The history of one of those medical interventions, the cesarean section, dates back thousands of years and was mentioned in Greek mythology. Among the many odd contraptions proposed to aid in childbirth was a device designed to propel the child right out of the womb with centrifugal force.

And, of course, there was the chain saw.

Social media and online accounts tell the chilling history of a device allegedly used in difficult childbirth that would break through parts of the childbearer’s pubic bone to make space for the fetus. Take, for example, the Reddit post below from 2021:

This claim is true. Some early hand-cranked saws mobilized by chains were invented in the 18th century to remove diseased bone and to conduct symphysiotomies, a method of breaking through pelvic bone and cartilage to assist in difficult vaginal births. 

However, we should note some important nuances before diving into the history of the medical chain saw. These early renditions are considered an “obstetrical ‘prototype’” of the common chain saw, a medical archivist confirmed to Snopes. Most importantly, early medical chain saws were very different from mechanical chain saws used in the timber industry today. 

Let’s dive in:

Chain Saws for Use in Childbirth Sought to Remedy Other Dangerous Emergency Methods

Jacqueline Cahif, an archivist at the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, confirmed to Snopes that the surgical hand chain saw was indeed invented for use in childbirth. What’s unclear is whether the two inventing doctors, John Aitken and James Jeffray, worked independently on the “obstetrical ‘prototype’ of the common chainsaw.” 

An article published in 2004 in the peer-reviewed Scottish Medical Journal also credited Aitken and Jeffray with the invention of the chain saw. This early version consisted mainly of a finely serrated link chain cut on the concave side, with handles on either side to saw through bone and cartilage. 

In the 18th century, doctors commonly responded to birth emergencies in one of three ways, according to a 2010 article in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. The first involved a craniotomy to fracture a fetus’ skull, resulting in infant death to save the mother. Performing C-sections often resulted in the death of the mother, mainly through hemorrhage. 

Doctors would also conduct a symphysiotomy, which involved breaking a joint between the left and right pubic bones, known as the pubic symphysis. Before the invention of the chain saw, this was done with a scalpel, which risked also damaging the bladder and urethra. (A flexible chain saw could break bone in hard-to-access areas but came with its own shortcomings, mainly breakage or entrapment in the patient’s bone.) 

Cahif referred our newsroom to three contemporary works by Aitken and Jeffray in which the devices were described and which were used by the authors to support their work.

Aitken Is Largely Credited with the Invention of the Medical Chain Saw

Little is known about Aitken’s early life, though historians assume he was trained in Edinburgh, where he became a fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons in 1770. Subsequently, he lectured on surgery, midwifery and anatomy. 

Two works published by the Edinburgh obstetrician in 1786 described his medical chain saw: “A system of obstetrical tables, with explanations; representing the foundations of the theory and practice of midwifery” and “Principles of midwifery, or puerperal medicine.” The latter illustrated the chain saw prototype used in Aitken’s “dissecting room,” as well as other instrumental innovations. 

Aitken’s saw is also described in a May 2009 article published in the Journal of Medical Biography. It described the device as “a flexible saw based on a watch chain with teeth to cut from inside outwards.” 

Unfortunately, both knife and saw often injured the urethra and bladder, and symphysiotomy never became popular, the article noted, adding that Aitken’s saw was later adapted for bone cutting, particularly joint excision, followed by its mechanization to cut on the outside of an endless chain. 

“Sadly its hand-powered speed proved inadequate to cut compact bone expeditiously. Nevertheless, this concept was the eventual source of today’s successful chainsaw of the timber industry,” the article said.

Jeffray Used the Chain Saw to Remove Diseased Bone

Jeffray, a professor of anatomy at the University of Glasgow, is credited with recommending the chain saw for joint excision and, by some, its invention. In 1802, Jeffray published “Cases of the excision of carious joints” which mentioned the use of chain saws for operating on wounds, removing limbs and cutting through bones. In particular, the article described successful excision of diseased joints, namely the knee and elbow. However, Jeffray received his medical degree in obstetrics at Edinburgh, where scholars argue he likely attended Aitken’s lectures.

Jeffray’s interest in the medical chain saw was not rooted in childbirth, but rather in removing diseased bones. He leaned on methods produced by Liverpool surgeon Henry Park, who operated on the knees and elbows of those infected by tuberculosis or wounded on the battlefield. This method involved “cutting through the bone with an amputation saw, on each side of the defective joint, to remove diseased tissue.” 

Modern Renditions of the Medical Chain Saw 

A later version of the medical chain saw was proposed by Bernard Heine in 1830 in what would become the first mechanical chain saw, known as the “osteotome.” This rendition incorporated an endless chain sped up using a hand gear — a model that would ultimately inspire modern timber chain saws. Heine’s osteotome was notably used during the Civil War for amputation, which is outlined in this 2010 article in the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 

Bernard Heine’s chain saw, known as the osteotome, had a hand crank but was still difficult to use. Heine was one of the few surgeons who mastered it. This chain saw is the version most commonly referenced in social media posts, like this Reddit post. 

In 1894, Italian obstetrician Leonardo Gigli introduced another modification to the medical chain saw, the Gigli saw. This flexible wire saw, described in the Journal of Neurosurgery, is still used today for the amputation of extremities. 

Origination of Chain Saws Used in Timber Industry

Canadian millwright James Shand is credited with inventing the first portable chain saw, which he patented in 1918. According to the British Columbia Provincial Museum, the “idea came to him while he was fencing his quarter-section of land and discovered that the barbed wire, drawn by horses, had sawn through a seven-inch oak post.” 

Sources

For years, a claim has circulated online that 40 squirrels were trained to crack nuts for the 2005 movie “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” “Did you know? 40 real squirrels were trained to crack nuts for Charlie and the Chocolate Factory instead of using robot,” a 2022 iFunny post read (archived):

(iFunny user @elite_amazing_facts_2021)

“TIL Rather than use CGI, Tim Burton had 40 squirrels trained to crack nuts for Charlie & The Chocolate Factory,” one Reddit user claimed in 2017. “Did they get paid or were they just free labor?” an X user asked in 2019. 

In short, because real squirrels were indeed trained to crack nuts in the 2005 Tim Burton movie, we have rated this claim as “True.”

“Forty squirrels were trained to crack nuts in the new film Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” BBC News wrote in July 2005, adding that even with sophisticated computer-generated technology available, Burton opted for real effects. Revealing the behind-the-scenes preparations, animal trainer Steve Vedmore, who worked on the film for eight weeks, spoke in an interview for the article:

Because of a confidentiality agreement with Warner Bros, he can’t reveal exactly what happened on set but, having worked with squirrels before, he says some are easy to train and some aren’t.

“The placid ones are good to handle and other ones are aggressive, so we use them as runner animals if we can run them from A to B because they’re not good for human contact. They bite.”

Training is based on food rewards, so the squirrels got nuts when they did what was required.

“You shape their behaviour so if you’re running them from A to B – which could be 100m – you put catching boxes inches away so they run into the box and get a reward. Then you put the box further and further away.”

Some worked harder than others, while some filled up on nuts very quickly and then lost interest, he says.

“For the film, the squirrels were used for 10 months, including training,” the article said, adding that the “American Humane Association supervised the training to make sure no animal was made to do anything which might cause it distress.”

Below you can find the scene from the movie that featured real squirrels:

A documentary short titled “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory: Attack of the Squirrels” offers a look at how the squirrels were trained:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNDtqJ3pGyg

This isn’t the first time we’ve investigated a squirrel-related claim. In May 2024, we looked at social media posts reporting that a wife stabbed husband with a squirrel. In April 2017, we fact-checked a rumor that a woman was arrested for training squirrels to attack her ex-boyfriend.

In his first televised interview since his admittedly “bad” presidential debate, President Joe Biden made a few exaggerated and misleading statements.

Here’s what Biden said in his 22-minute, prime-time interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos on July 5:

• Biden exaggerated when he claimed that the U.S. share of global semiconductor — or chip — production capacity has declined to “virtually nothing.”

• Biden, again, wrongly claimed that former President Donald Trump told the public to inject bleach as a treatment for COVID-19.

• Biden denied that he had fallen further behind Trump in post-debate polling, saying “nothing’s changed substantially since the debate in the New York Times poll.” The Times post-debate poll showed Trump ahead by 6 percentage points — an increase of 3 points.

• Biden repeated his misleading talking point that Trump “lost more jobs than he created.” That ignores the swift and devastating economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Semiconductors

Biden claimed that the U.S. share of global semiconductor — or chip — production capacity has declined to “virtually nothing.” That’s a bit of an exaggeration.

“We used to have 40% of computer chips,” the president said. “We invented the chip, the little chip, the computer chip. It’s in everything from cellphones to weapons. And so, we used to have 40%, and we’re down to virtually nothing.”

The federal government “played a central role in the development of semiconductors” and the U.S. used to account for about 40% of semiconductor fabrication capacity in 1990, according to a Congressional Research Service report published in 2020. The capacity share in North America — primarily the U.S. — had declined to 11% in 2019, which ranked fifth in the world behind South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and China, the report said.

CRS described the chips as small electronic devices that are “fundamental to nearly all modern industrial and national security activities” and “essential building blocks of other emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, 5G communications, and quantum computing.”

Concerns about the competitiveness of the U.S. semiconductor industry led to Biden signing into law in August 2022 the CHIPS and Science Act, which, among other things, included $39 billion for a fund designed to boost chip manufacturing capacity in the country.

In a report released in May, the Semiconductor Industry Association, along with the Boston Consulting Group, projected that investments “facilitated by incentives under the CHIPS Act” would lead the U.S. share of global fab capacity to grow from “10% today to 14% by 2032.” Without new investments, U.S. fab capacity would have gone down to 8% by 2032, the joint report said.

Bleach

Biden, again, wrongly claimed that Trump told the public to inject bleach as a treatment for COVID-19.

“This is a guy who told us to put bleach in our arms to deal with COVID, with a million — over a million people died,” Biden said, referring to U.S. deaths from the disease.

As we’ve written, Biden is twisting the words of Trump, who never told public to “put bleach” in their bodies. During an April 2020 press briefing at the White House, Trump suggested that scientists at the Department of Homeland Security test the use of “very powerful light” and “disinfectant” in the body to kill the virus that causes COVID-19. He did not tell Americans to try it themselves.

New York Times Poll

Stephanopoulos said Biden fell “further behind” Trump in national polling after the June 27 debate, including the latest New York Times/Siena College poll that showed Trump up by 6 percentage points. The president pushed back, saying the New York Times/Siena College poll showed him “behind 10 points” prior to the debate and “nothing’s changed substantially since the debate in the New York Times poll.”

But, as Stephanopoulos said, the latest Times/Siena poll shows Trump has widened his lead. The former president now leads Biden “49 percent to 43 percent among likely voters nationally, a three-point swing toward the Republican from just a week earlier, before the debate,” the Times wrote. That’s the largest lead Trump “has recorded in a Times/Siena poll since 2015,” the Times article said.

Even with independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. included, the Times/Siena poll shows Trump up by 5 points — 42% to 37% — with Kennedy receiving 8% among likely voters.

The poll’s margin of error was “plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for the likely electorate.”

In other polling, the Suffolk University/USA Today National Voter Poll found Trump “edged ahead” of Biden 41% to 38% in a poll of registered voters, while Kennedy polled 8%. The two major party candidates were tied at 37% in May.

Trump’s 3 point lead is within the Suffolk/USA Today poll’s margin of error, which is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

As Stephanopoulos noted, Biden won the popular vote by more than 7 million in 2020, but it took narrow victories in a few swing states for Biden to win the Electoral College and the presidency.

Biden’s Talking Point on Jobs

As he did during the debate, and on many other occasions, Biden compared Trump to Herbert Hoover, the Depression-era president. Biden said Trump — like Hoover — “lost more jobs than he created.”

But, as we’ve written, Biden is ignoring the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The U.S. added nearly 6.7 million jobs in Trump’s first 37 months in office. But a string of 37 months of consecutive job growth ended in March 2020, when the economy lost 1.4 million jobs and bottomed out the next month when it lost nearly 20.5 million jobs, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The job market started to recover in May 2020. But by the end of Trump’s four years, the U.S. had about 2.7 million fewer total jobs.

Under Biden, employment is up 6.2 million from the pre-pandemic peak in February 2020 — but the total increase since Biden took office in January 2021 is about 15.6 million, BLS data show.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, 202 S. 36th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104. 

Internet users have dubbed him the “unluckiest bear in the world,” making Joey, a bear with unusual coloring, the stuff of online urban legend. As the story goes, this “albino brown bear” (sometimes described as an “albino grizzly bear,” depending on the source) was airlifted to the Arctic time and time again after being mistaken for a polar bear. 

Snopes determined that online posts making this claim about an albino bear date back to at least 2021, with a recent iteration of it resurfacing almost every year since, and again in 2024. One example includes the below video shared to TikTok on April 29, 2023, which had amassed more than 4.2 million views at the time of this publication. 

Snopes did not find any credible reports to corroborate the tale, though. Furthermore, wildlife expert Geoff York, the senior director of research and policy at Polar Bears International, a nonprofit polar bear conservation organization, told us this story likely “originated as a spoof.”

Why? For one thing, the light-phase bear (“phase” refers to color variations in bears) shown in the video is “clearly not a polar bear,” York said. 

According to the wildlife educational facility North American Bear Center, black bears can appear in more colors than any other North American mammals, from black and brown to cinnamon, blond, blue-gray or even white. East of the Great Plains, nearly all black bear (Ursus americanus) individuals are black. 

“The melanin in black fur makes the fur resistant to abrasion in the brushy understory of eastern forests,” writes the organization. But in western states with mountain meadows, over half of the black bears are brown, cinnamon or blond. 

“Light-colored fur reduces heat stress in open sunlight and allows the bears to feed longer in open, food-rich habitats. The lighter-colored fur may also camouflage them from predators in those open areas,” adds the North American Bear Center. 

Similarly, brown or grizzly bears may also exhibit a wide variety of hair coloration, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Coat coloring is determined by genetics, which some experts speculate could have led to white-colored brown bears. (This is not the same as albinism, a condition in which the absence of melanin in the body results in white skin and hair.)

Another strike against the “mistaken for a polar bear” tale is the fact that relocating a bear from North America to the Arctic would be an effort requiring unrealistic international coordination and resources. 

“Broadly speaking, animal welfare groups do not engage in relocation efforts and typically lack the management authority and funding necessary to capture and transport animals nationally, let alone across international borders,” explained York. 

“As we all understand, transporting a bear the distances mentioned would be dramatically expensive and require international collaboration — the likes of which we have not seen for some time. Having been to the North Pole, I can also say it is among the last places you would attempt to re-home anything.”

Sources

In June 2024, posts went viral on Facebook, claiming that Miss Thailand wore a dress made of soda can tabs as a tribute to her parents, who worked as garbage collectors. “Her parents have obviously done a great job of raising her,” one Facebook user commented.

The story was also shared on other social media platforms, such as Instagram, Pinterest, and LinkedIn.

It’s true that Miss Thailand wore a dress made of soda can tabs at the Miss Universe preliminary competition in January 2023. Though Anna Sueangam-iam did not explicitly state that the dress was “a tribute to her parents who worked as garbage collectors,” she wrote in an Instagram post that it was inspired by the familiar surroundings of her childhood and later added that she grew up with garbage-collector parents. Because of that, we have rated this claim as “Mostly True.”

We have reached out to Sueangam-iam and we will update this article if and when we receive a response. 

Sueangam-iam shared photographs of her unique dress on her Instagram account @annasnga_1o, on Jan. 12, 2023. 

The post’s caption informed that growing up with garbage-collector parents, Sueangam-iam’s lived among piles of garbage and recyclables as a child:

🔗 My Gown – My Personal Statement to the #Universe 🔗

This gown was inspired by the familiar surroundings of my childhood. Growing up with garbage collector parents, my life as a child was among piles of garbage and recyclables. This unique gown was purposefully tailored-made with discarded and recycled materials, namely the ‘Can Tab’ to present to the UNIVERSE that what’s considered worthless by many actually possesses its own value and beauty.

Thank you all for seeing it, hearing it, and hopefully being that message of self-worth. 🕊

An official Instagram account of Miss Universe Thailand, @missuniverse.in.th, also shared photographs of Sueangam-iam’s dress.

The post said she was brought up by a “father who is a garbage collector, street-sweeper mother, and a virtuous nun who was Anna’s great-grandmother”:

“You must not get stuck with murky surroundings you were born into, but do believe you have the power to change your own life for the better,” the inspirational quote by “Anna Sueangam-iam”, Miss Universe Thailand 2022, precisely reflects and self-defines her own significant characteristic.

Persistence, tenaciousness and optimism within her have led her to a great success in life. It is the result of being brought up by a father who is a garbage collector, street-sweeper mother, and a virtuous nun who was Anna’s great-grandmother. Although she was called by some as “The garbage beauty queen,” that never stops her from shining bright as a precious gem.

From her empowering life story, the message is conveyed through this “Hidden Precious Diamond Dress”. Meticulously created from used aluminium pull-tabs of drink cans and Swarovki combined, this unique upcycled dress designed by “MANIRAT” is at its most promptness to be found on the universal stage.

Sueangam-iam’s bio, shared on the website of the Miss Universe Organization, said she grew up in a Bangkok slum and was later sent to a temple for safety, where she survived on leftover food from monks while living among Buddhist nuns:

At an early age, poverty differentiated her life at school from other children, especially the cost of tuition. In order to cover her tuition fees, she had to collect merit points, donate blood every semester, collect plastic waste bottles, and clean public restrooms. This experience made her question the accessibility Thai children had to education.

Having overcome this challenge, Sueangam-iam would like to represent all the children from less privileged backgrounds and amplify their voices. She uses her bigger voice to collaborate with many nonprofit organizations in order to provide children with access to educational systems. She has conducted the “Do it, Earn it” campaign, supports the project No Mixed Waste, participates in a Saturday school project, and works with Smile Train Thailand.

This wasn’t the first time we investigated a Thailand-related story. For instance, in April 2024, we looked at a post claiming that the quick thinking of a 10-year-old English girl, Tilly Smith, helped save some 100 lives just before the Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 struck the island of Phuket. We also unpacked a rumor claiming that rocker Billy Idol once had to be subdued by Thai police with a tranquilizer dart after he partied for three weeks in a Bangkok hotel suite.

For years, a meme has circulated online claiming that 27 million Black people were held as slaves in Muslim countries, including this one (archived) from July 2024:

The same meme appeared on a public forum and Instagram. It also appeared in German, with a different number (30 million).

The meme, as we’ll see, is incorrect. 

In 2011, Reuters reported that then-U.S. Ambassador-at-Large Luis CdeBaca said there were an estimated 27 million people total living under slavery in the modern world, and that people fleeing violence from North Africa — a majority Muslim region — were most at risk for enslavement. The viral meme appears to have borrowed and twisted that piece of information. 

Modern slavery, whose definition includes forced labor and forced marriage, is a major issue, according to various international human rights organizations focused on it — including the United Nations and Walk Free, an organization based in Australia. The estimated number in 2023 was roughly 50 million people, according a 2022 report shared by the U.N. Walk Free matched this number in its 2023 estimates, with a ballpark number of 49.6 million. According to Walk Free, 27.6 million lived in forced labor conditions, and 22 million were in forced marriages.

We calculated that the estimated number of enslaved people — both forced labor and forced marriage — in Muslim countries was roughly 14.6 million as of this writing. We obtained this number using Walk Free’s data and adding the estimated number of slaves listed on the website for each majority Muslim country in Walk Free’s interactive tool (you can find that tool here):

(Walk Free)

The graphic above, generated by the website, includes 55 countries. 

Walk Free further estimated that 1 in 4 enslaved people were children, a number that corresponded to around 12.5 million, and 54% were women.

The data did not include provenance and skin color of enslaved people, though it did include regional data for the prevalence of the problem. While the largest absolute number of enslaved people lived in Asia, Arab countries, which are majority Muslim, had the largest prevalence with 10.1 enslaved people per 1,000 people. Europe was second with 6.9 per 1,000. A breakdown by country showed that the five countries with the highest number of slaves per 1,000 people were North Korea, Eritrea, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.

SciCheck Digest

COVID-19 vaccination is generally very safe, and except for extremely rare cases, there is no evidence that it contributes to death. Social media posts about a now-published, but faulty review of autopsy reports, however, are repeating an unfounded claim from last summer that “74% of sudden deaths are shown to be due to the COVID-19 vaccine.”

How safe are the COVID-19 vaccines?

Full Story

Last July, an unpublished paper authored by several physicians known for spreading COVID-19 misinformation briefly appeared on a preprint server hosted by the prestigious British medical journal the Lancet. 

The paper claimed to have reviewed autopsy reports and found — in the opinion of three of its authors — that 73.9% of the selected deaths were “directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.” Those conclusions, however, were often contrary to the original scientists’ determinations. Moreover, abundant evidence contradicts the suggestion that the COVID-19 vaccines are frequently killing people.

The preprint repository quickly removed the manuscript because, it said, “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology,” and indicated that the preprint had violated its screening criteria. 

Social media soon flooded with posts highlighting the purported findings and alleging censorship, with many falsely stating that the paper had been published in the Lancet.

Multiple scientists and fact checkers detailed numerous problems with the preprint and the resulting social media posts. As Dr. Jonathan Laxton, an assistant professor of medicine at the University of Manitoba who frequently debunks misinformation online, wrote at the time on Twitter, “this is not a conspiracy, the paper was literally biased hot garbage and the Lancet was right to remove it.”

Despite these efforts, the same claims are back this summer after the paper was published in the journal Forensic Science International on June 21. Capitalizing on the paper’s now-published status, numerous posts are once again spreading the review’s supposed findings and realleging censorship.

“Largest autopsy series in the world. Censored by what was the most reputable peer reviewed journal,” reads one popular Instagram post. “74% of the 325 Suddenly Died Autopsies point the cause to the dart,” it added, using coded language to refer to the COVID-19 vaccines.

Another post, from Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, an osteopathic physician in Ohio known for her opposition to vaccines and her false claim that the COVID-19 vaccines magnetize people, also repeated the falsehood that the paper had been previously published in the Lancet.

“Bottom line results: 74% of sudden deaths are shown to be due to the COVID-19 vaccine,” the post went on to say. “This paper is a game changer. Sadly, it was censored for ONE YEAR. Just think of all the lives that could have been saved.”

As we’ve explained before, publication in a peer reviewed journal does not necessarily mean a paper is accurate or trustworthy, although the process can improve manuscripts and weed out bad science. In this case, the published paper is highly similar to the previously criticized manuscript. Experts say its conclusions are unreliable and misleading.

“The vast majority of these cases do not show a causal, but coincidental, effect,” wrote Marc Veldhoen, an immunologist at the Instituto de Medicina Molecular João Lobo Antunes in Portugal, in a thread on X, addressing the paper’s central claim. “This certainly does not apply to the general population!”

When asked about the published paper, Dr. Cristina Cattaneo, co-editor-in-chief of Forensic Science International, told us the journal was “currently looking into the matter.”

Problematic ‘Review’

For their “review,” the authors searched the medical literature for published autopsy studies related to any kind of COVID-19 vaccination. After excluding duplicates and studies without deaths, autopsies, or vaccination status information, the authors were left with 44 studies comprising 325 autopsies. Three of the authors then reviewed the described cases and decided for themselves if the deaths were vaccine-related; if at least two agreed, the death was counted as being attributable to COVID-19 vaccination.

In the end, the authors thought 240, or nearly 74%, of the reviewed autopsies were vaccine-related (rounded to one decimal, 240 out of 325 is actually 73.8%, not 73.9% as reported in the paper). Among these deaths, 46.3% occurred after a Sinovac vaccine, 30.1% after a Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, 14.6% after an AstraZeneca vaccine, 7.5% after a Moderna vaccine and 1.3% after a Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

As others have pointed out before, there’s reason to suspect that the authors may have been biased in their determinations. All three adjudicators, including Dr. Peter McCullough, are well known for spreading COVID-19 misinformation. Dr. William Makis, a Canadian radiologist, has previously claimed, without evidence, that 80 Canadian doctors died from COVID-19 vaccines. The only pathologist, Dr. Roger Hodkinson, incorrectly claimed in 2020 that COVID-19 was a “hoax” and “just a bad flu.”

Hodkinson and McCullough, along with five other authors, are also affiliated with and have a financial interest in The Wellness Company, a supplement and telehealth company that sells unproven treatments, including for purported protection against vaccines.

Perhaps most tellingly, the scientists who conducted many of the autopsy studies came to opposite conclusions than the review authors. Of the 240 cases, for example, 105 come from a single paper in Colombia, whose authors found “[n]o relation between the cause of death and vaccination.”

Similarly, the review authors counted 24 of 28 autopsies from a study from Singapore as vaccine-related, even though the original authors identified “no definite causative relationship” to mRNA vaccines.

The authors of a German study also attributed 13 of 18 autopsy deaths to preexisting diseases, but the review authors decided 16 cases were vaccine-related.

In a LinkedIn post debunking the preprint, Dr. Mathijs Binkhorst, a Dutch pediatrician, went back to each cited paper, and found that of the 325 autopsies and one heart necropsy the review authors said were vaccine-related, only 31, or 9.5%, were likely related and 28, or 8.6%, were possibly related. The rest — 267, or 81.9% — were unlikely, uncertainly, or not related to vaccination.

In other words, even among a set of studies that is more likely to identify some vaccine involvement, less than a fifth of deaths were possibly or likely vaccine-related.

Even if the authors aren’t biased, this type of study is not able to provide information on how frequently COVID-19 vaccination leads to death, and whether the risks outweigh the benefits.

“They only looked at ‘published autopsy and necropsy reports relating to COVID-19 vaccination,’” Veldhoen said of the published study on X. “If you look only at autopsies of those related (in time) with drugX: X-involvement is then a high proportion of all cases.”

Indeed, as Binkhorst noted, the autopsy reports come from 14 countries that collectively administered some 2.2 billion vaccine doses. If the COVID-19 vaccines truly were as dangerous as the review authors contend, this would be evident in other data sources — but it’s not.

Vaccine safety surveillance systems and other studies from across the globe have found that serious side effects can occur, but they are rare. 

The Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca vaccines, for example, can in very rare cases cause a dangerous and sometimes fatal blood clotting condition combined with low blood platelets. 

Rarely, the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech have caused inflammation of the heart muscle or surrounding tissue, known as myocarditis or pericarditis. In almost all cases, however, those conditions are not deadly.

There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccination increases the risk of death and has led to excess deaths or a large number of deaths. Instead, a wealth of data supports the notion that COVID-19 vaccines protect against severe disease and death from COVID-19. The flawed autopsy “review” doesn’t change this.

Sources

Roley, Gwen. “Misinformation swirls around unpublished paper on Covid-19 vaccine risks.” AFP. 14 Jul 2023.

Hulscher, Nicolas et al. “A Systematic REVIEW of Autopsy findings in deaths after covid-19 vaccination.” Forensic Science International. Available online 21 Jun 2024.

Binkhorst, Mathijs. “McCullough’s misinformation.” LinkedIn post. Archived 4 Sep 2023.

Laxton, Jonathan (@dr_jon_l). “McCullough et al attempted upload a preprint to the Lancet server, and it was removed because it was hot garbage.  However, I feel going through this paper for you guys will help you spot dodgy science …” X. 6 Jul 2023.

Payne, Ed. “Fact Check: A ‘Lancet Study’ Does NOT Show COVID Vaccine Caused 74% Of Deaths In Sample — Lancet Rejected Paper And Its Methods.” Lead Stories. 7 Jul 2023.

Carballo-Carbajal, Iria. “Flawed preprint based on autopsies inadequate to demonstrate that COVID-19 vaccines caused 74% of those deaths.” Health Feedback. 31 Jul 2023.

Jaramillo, Catalina. “Review Article By Misinformation Spreaders Misleads About mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines .” FactCheck.org. 16 Feb 2024.

Veldhoen, Marc (@Marc_Veld). “Does ‘We found that 73.9% of deaths were directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.’ Hold? No. The vast majority of these cases do not show a causal, but coincidental, effect. This certainly does not apply to the general population!” X. 22 Jun 2024.

Cattaneo, Cristina. Co-Editor-in-Chief, Forensic Science International. Email to FactCheck.org. 26 Jun 2024.

“No evidence that 80 Canadian doctors died from COVID vaccinations.” Reuters Fact Check. 22 Dec 2022.

Lajka, Arijeta. “Pathologist falsely claims COVID-19 is a hoax, no worse than the flu.” AP. 2 Dec 2020.

Yandell, Kate. “Posts Push Unproven ‘Spike Protein Detoxification’ Regimen.” FactCheck.org. 21 Sep 2023.

Chaves, Juan José et al. “A postmortem study of patients vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 in Colombia.” Revista Española de Patología. 31 Oct 2022.

Yeo, Audrey et al. “Post COVID-19 vaccine deaths – Singapore’s early experience.” Forensic Science International. 19 Jan 2022.

Schneider, Julia et al. “Postmortem investigation of fatalities following vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines.” International Journal of Legal Medicine. 30 Sep 2021.

Yandell, Kate. “Study Largely Confirms Known, Rare COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects.” FactCheck.org. 27 Feb 2024.

“Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination.” CDC. Accessed 5 Jul 2024.

“COVID-19 vaccines: key facts.” European Medicines Agency. Accessed 5 Jul 2024.

Robertson, Lori. “A Guide to Johnson & Johnson’s COVID-19 Vaccine.” FactCheck.org. 27 Feb 2021.

Lai, Francisco Tsz Tsun et al. “Prognosis of Myocarditis Developing After mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination Compared With Viral Myocarditis.” Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 5 Dec 2022.

Yandell, Kate. “No Evidence Excess Deaths Linked to Vaccines, Contrary to Claims Online.” FactCheck.org. 17 Apr 2023.

McDonald, Jessica. “Flawed Analysis of New Zealand Data Doesn’t Show COVID-19 Vaccines Killed Millions.” FactCheck.org. 15 Dec 2023.

On June 28, 2024, the Facebook page titled USA Patriotism published a post positing that farm supply store chain Tractor Supply Co. had lost $300 million after “going woke”:

Tractor Supply Co Loses $300 Million After Going Woke, “We Don’t Know What Went Wrong”

One commenter appeared to lend the story credibility by providing more context for the alleged claim, linking to a post about Tractor Supply’s ‘Wokeness’ on X (archived):

As of this writing, the “Tractor Supply Co Loses $300 Million” post had gained 4,500 reactions and 1,700 comments. Other commenters responded approvingly. “Good deal. Glad to see folks voting with their wallets! ‘Merica has spoken. Go woke go broke,” one asserted. “Good job TS ! You’re getting what you deserve,” another said.

This item was not a factual recounting of real-life events, however. The article originated with a page that describes its output as being “humorous” or “satirical” in nature, as follows:

We are love [sic] the US.
We specialize in SATIRE and Humor.

The pinned comment below the Facebook post linked to pages with suspicious URLs such as ntusnew.boonovel.com, which redirected users to pages that listed nothing but dubious advertisements. 

For background, here is why we sometimes write about satire/humor.