Category: Fact Checking

As the U.S. formally exited from the World Health Organization last month, Trump administration officials misleadingly claimed that the WHO “pushed” or “promoted” lockdowns during the COVID-19 pandemic. The group did not explicitly recommend lockdowns, although it also did not advise countries not to implement them. It said it recognized that the measures might be needed in some cases.

More than six years after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, federal health officials are spinning the facts about the WHO as part of their justification to leave the organization. The U.S. formally exited the WHO on Jan. 22, a year after giving notice to do so, much to the chagrin of many in public health.

The WHO “ignored rigorous science and promoted lockdowns,” Acting Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Jim O’Neill wrote on the day of the exit in an X post that also made claims about Taiwan.

The same day, National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya similarly said in an interview on Fox News that the WHO “absolutely failed during the pandemic … pushing, still to this day … lockdown policies that plagued Americans for years.”

Those comments led to contentious exchanges with WHO officials who have taken issue with the statements.

“All untrue,” Maria Van Kerkhove, an infectious disease epidemiologist and the WHO’s technical lead for COVID-19, responded to O’Neill in a Jan. 24 post, adding, “we don’t ignore science and WHO never recommended lockdowns.”

The WHO also pushed back in a Jan. 24 statement, writing, “WHO recommended the use of masks, vaccines and physical distancing, but at no stage recommended mask mandates, vaccine mandates or lockdowns. We supported sovereign governments to make decisions they believed were in the best interests of their people, but the decisions were theirs.”

The dispute recalls a similar situation in October 2020 when President Donald Trump, then in his first term, incorrectly said that the WHO had “just admitted” that he was “right” about lockdowns. Trump had criticized lockdowns, saying they were “worse than the problem itself.” Trump was in office at the height of the pandemic when COVID-19 restrictions in the U.S. were the most stringent.

As we wrote then, the WHO’s position on lockdowns had always been more nuanced — the group neither recommended the measures nor advised against them, saying it recognized that lockdowns can harm society but are sometimes necessary.

The organization did at times praise China’s aggressive response, and supported countries in their decisions, which could be interpreted as an implicit endorsement of the measures. But it’s an oversimplification to say that the WHO “pushed” or “promoted” lockdowns. We did not find evidence that the WHO explicitly recommended them, consistent with the organization’s statements.

We reached out to the NIH to ask about Bhattacharya’s comments and to the CDC to ask about O’Neill’s, but did not receive a reply. The WHO pointed us to a Q&A post — last updated Dec. 31, 2020 — that we also previously referenced, which notes that so-called “lockdown” measures can work to slow viral transmission but can have “a profound negative impact,” especially for disadvantaged groups.

“WHO recognizes that at certain points, some countries have had no choice but to issue stay-at-home orders and other measures, to buy time,” the post continues, adding that “WHO is hopeful that countries will use targeted interventions where and when needed, based on the local situation.”

Similar language also appears in an April 2020 WHO document, which states there is an “urgent need” to transition away from lockdown measures, but also cautions that premature lifting of restrictions without careful planning is likely to lead to an uncontrolled surge in COVID-19 cases.

It’s worth noting that there is no unified definition of what “lockdowns” are. While they generally refer to what the WHO terms “large scale physical distancing measures and movement restrictions,” they varied greatly in scope and severity in different countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. The U.S. version — which at its most restrictive involved stay-at-home orders and school and business closures, implemented by states and local governments — was far lighter than measures imposed in China, for example.

In some parts of China, residents at times could not leave their cities, were not allowed to use their own cars and needed permission to leave their apartments. In the U.S., there was never a federal lockdown, although the Trump administration issued guidelines that told people to avoid large gatherings and encouraged school and nonessential business closures early in the pandemic.

“My administration is recommending that all Americans, including the young and healthy, work to engage in schooling from home when possible. Avoid gathering in groups of more than 10 people. Avoid discretionary travel. And avoid eating and drinking at bars, restaurants, and public food courts,” Trump said on March 16, 2020, when announcing the government’s “15 Days to Slow the Spread,” which was later extended. On March 23, 2020, Trump said that “America will again, and soon, be open for business — very soon.”

The word “lockdown” has sometimes erroneously been applied to any public health measure, even those that don’t limit social interactions.

Contentious Exchanges

In response to Van Kerkhove’s post about O’Neill, Bhattacharya pointed to some text of the WHO-China Joint Mission report in February 2020, and wrote, “That is just plain false. The WHO mission to China in 2020 lauded the Chinese lockdown as a success, in effect endorsing the model for the rest of the world.”

The text he cited stated that the measures employed in China — at their core, proactive surveillance, rapid diagnosis and case isolation and tracking and quarantine of close contacts — “are the only measures that are currently proven to interrupt or minimize transmission” of the coronavirus. “Given the damage that can be caused by uncontrolled, community-level transmission of this virus, such an approach is warranted to save lives and to gain the weeks and months needed for the testing of therapeutics and vaccine development,” the report added.

Van Kerkhove, however, replied: “What you’re reading here is that we acknowledged that governments had to take tough decisions to protect their populations, but lockdowns were never recommended, nor were they a policy recommendation by @WHO.” 

Finishing the exchange, Bhattacharya wrote: “What I’m not reading here is a condemnation of lockdowns at a time where governments worldwide were seriously considering them. If you want the world to trust the WHO, take honest ownership of this failure.”

Bhattacharya has also objected to statements from the WHO’s leader, Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who had responded to an X post from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., saying that the HHS statement “contains inaccurate information” and that the WHO “never recommended lockdowns.”

“That is just deeply dishonest,” Bhattacharya wrote in a Jan. 24 X post. “If the WHO opposed lockdowns, where was the WHO condemnation of them in 2020 or 2021? Or of China’s lockdowns in 2022?”

A day later, Bhattacharya posted a thread with what he called “receipts” of evidence that the WHO is wrong, which included statements from the WHO about what countries should ideally do before lifting lockdown measures.

The disagreement between U.S. and WHO officials partly comes down to semantics. Bhattacharya is correct that the WHO mission praised China’s response — and that the group did not come out against lockdowns. But Van Kerkhove and the WHO have not claimed to have done so. Moreover, not opposing lockdowns is different from recommending them.

“WHO neither recommended nor categorically opposed lockdowns,” Van Kerkhove told us in an email responding to questions about the claims. “We recommended a comprehensive risk-based approach including surveillance, contact tracing, testing, quarantine (for those infected), isolation (for contacts), physical distancing, the use of masks/respirators, personal protective equipment for health workers, improved ventilation, vaccines, therapeutics and more. At the same time, we acknowledged that in some circumstances, countries felt they had no choice but to introduce lockdowns to prevent their health systems being overwhelmed resulting in more lives lost. We respected that choice, as it was their sovereign right, but we said that lockdowns should not be used as the primary or default strategy for controlling COVID-19, and highlighted their serious social and economic consequences.”

“We did say, repeatedly and clearly, that lockdowns came with risks and potential harms, and that they were not a sustainable solution,” she added.

She pointed to multiple examples of the WHO expressing this view or warning about the harms or potential harms of lockdown measures, including a speech the director-general gave in April 2020 that reminded nations that “there is a need to respect human rights and dignity” and that the “restrictive measures governments are implementing are already having a massive impact on livelihoods.”

“Lockdowns are a blunt instrument that have taken a heavy toll in many countries,” the WHO director-general similarly said in September 2020. “With the right mix of targeted and tailored measures, further national lockdowns can be avoided.”

Van Kerkhove also cited a Q&A video from the WHO that Van Kerkhove appeared in and was shared on social media in October 2020.

Bhattacharya cited the same video in his X thread, saying, “A WHO epidemiologist lauds lockdowns as a way to ‘stop’ covid outbreaks.”

Van Kerkhove said that was a “deliberate misinterpretation of what was said.” In the clip, speaking for the WHO, she said, “we haven’t recommended” lockdowns, adding that “we do recognize that some countries and some areas have had to use what is called so-called lockdown measures because they needed to buy themselves some time.” 

“This clip cannot be interpreted as me ‘lauding’ lockdowns,” she said.

Other individuals on social media have highlighted statements from February 2020 by Dr. Bruce Aylward, a Canadian physician and epidemiologist who was then a senior adviser to the WHO director-general, that Bhattacharya reshared on X.

During the press conference for the WHO-China joint mission, Aylward emphasized that what China had done did appear to be working. “What China has demonstrated is, you have to do this,” he said at one point. “If you do it, you can save lives and prevent thousands of cases of what is a very difficult disease.” 

Van Kerkhove said this was also a case of misinterpretation. “Dr Aylward spoke positively about China’s overall response to COVID-19, and recognized that other countries including Italy were now taking ‘extremely aggressive actions,’” she told us in an email. “Dr Aylward’s comment that ‘you have to do this’ was a reference to the overall ‘aggressive’ or ‘rigorous’ approach that was needed to stop transmission and save lives, not specifically to the role of lockdowns.”

Aylward “did not recommend that countries impose lockdowns,” she added, pointing to earlier comments of his that day, in which he said “it’s important that other countries think about” applying “not necessarily the full lockdowns … but that same rigorous approach.”

Lawrence Gostin, a global health law professor at Georgetown University, told us that it is “certainly true that WHO officials praised China’s COVID-19 [response], and that was irresponsible.”

But, he added, “we forget how frightening the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic were. We had no vaccines or treatments and the virus was spreading exponentially. In that context, a temporary lockdown was clearly justified to buy time for the development and deployment of vaccines. Lockdowns were also intended to protect overwhelmed hospitals and health workers. It is easy to blame WHO for its proactive response in the midst of a global crisis. But it’s wrong.”

He said Bhattacharya’s posts “lack any subtlety or context” and emphasized that the WHO “has no power to order lockdowns & it never did.”

---

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, P.O. Box 58100, Philadelphia, PA 19102. 

Claim:

A vintage black-and-white photo shared online for years shows members of the Rothschild family standing next to a demon.

Rating:

In early February 2026, a vintage black-and-white image resurfaced online allegedly showing the Rothschild family, a European banking dynasty stretching back several centuries, standing in front of a house alongside a creature that looked like a demon.

For example, one X user who posted the picture wrote (archived): “Wait, what? So this was actually a real Rothschild Family Photo. Wild.”

(X user @BGatesIsaPyscho)

Examples of the claim appeared on X and Facebook as early as 2024. One X user wanted to know if the picture had been manipulated, while others replied to the post asking whether the image was real.

However, details in the image revealed it was generated using artificial intelligence (AI) software. The facial features of the two children — such as the ears, eyes, noses and mouths — were visibly distorted, along with the collars of the two men. Such inconsistencies are a common feature of AI-generated images.

AI-detection sites Umm-Maybe AI and Hive Moderation both concluded the picture was highly likely to be AI-generated. (It should be noted that such tools are fallible and therefore are not sufficient, on their own, to determine the authenticity of a photo.)

Given the above, we rated this photo fake.

(Hugging Face / Umm-Maybe AI-image-detector)

(Hive Moderation AI-Generated Content Detection)

According to a reverse image search, a Tumblr account posted the earliest iteration of the picture in late May 2023, alongside other clearly AI-generated images. It was not possible to confirm whether the Tumblr account posted the original version of the photo.

Snopes contacted the user and several other social media accounts who posted some of the earliest versions of the image on online (archived, archived) to ask where they sourced it from. We will update this article if we hear back from them.

Other social media users had previously used the same image to satirize numerous families and groups whom they jokingly claimed it depicted, such as the British royal family, the family of Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and British Conservative politician Jacob Rees-Mogg’s family.

Snopes previously published a separate fact check debunking the picture.

The Rothschilds are best known as a European banking dynasty stretching back several centuries. They are frequently the target of misinformation and antisemitic conspiracy theories, such as linking the family to the Illuminati, the New World Order, and other shadowy groups that supposedly influence world governments. They have also been blamed for starting wars for personal gain, funding the Holocaust, and assassinating U.S. presidents.

Snopes has previously addressed false claims about the family’s wealth, their alleged desire for a third world war and numerous other subjects.

Sources

Yes, Kid Rock sang ‘I like ’em underage’ and ‘some say that’s statutory’ in ‘Cool, Daddy Cool’

Feb. 5, 2026

Users shared the lyrics after Turning Point USA announced the musician would perform in a specia …

Read More

Claim:

In 2012, an Ohio woman was arrested after breaking into a home, cleaning it and leaving a $75 bill for services rendered.

Rating:

A rumor circulating online in early February 2026 claimed that an Ohio woman once broke into someone’s home, cleaned it and left a $75 bill in an effort to attract new customers for her cleaning business.

Users shared the claim on social media platforms like Instagram (archived), alleging that the woman was arrested after a girl who was asleep inside the home called the police when she discovered her mother had not hired a cleaner. 

The claim that an Ohio woman broke into a home, cleaned it and left a bill for her services is true. 

The Westlake Police Department arrested the woman, identified as Susan Warren, on May 29, 2012, according to the Cuyahoga County Clerk of Courts. We’ve embedded a PDF of the case record below. 

The case record shows Warren, dubbed the “Cleaning Fairy,” posted a $5,000 bail on June 9, 2012, and later pleaded guilty to charges of attempted burglary and trespassing in a habitation when a person is present. 

Snopes reached out to the Westlake Police Department for a copy of Warren’s arrest record and will update this article if we receive a response. 

On June 1, 2012, ABC News reported details of Warren’s arrest that matched those included in the case record. According to the report, Warren broke into a home in Westlake, Ohio, and “vacuumed the carpet, cleaned up the play room and removed the trash,” without realizing a woman was asleep in the house. 

The woman, identified as Mallory Bush, told a Cleveland ABC News affiliate that when she woke, items in the house had been moved and “it was cleaner.” Bush also found a note on a napkin that read, “Came here to clean today,” which included a name, address and a bill for $75. She assumed her parents had hired a cleaner, the news report said.

According to the report, Bush’s mother told her daughter that they did not hire a cleaner and to call the police. 

FOX 8 News in Cleveland interviewed Warren on camera after she was released from jail. In a YouTube video dated June 13, 2012, Warren told the interviewer, “I never stole anything, I left a bill on a napkin, which was very unprofessional, I get that. I just needed money… I realize I made a mistake. I just lost two weeks of my life.”

Snopes could not immediately reach Warren for comment. The phone number listed on Warren’s business page was no longer in service. 

On Jan. 24, 2013, ABC News reported another incident involving Warren in which she was arrested “for shoveling someone’s driveway without their permission.” 

In that instance, Lorain County Correction Officer Anthony Conrod told ABC News, “We arrested her because she had a warrant out of Cuyahoga County. She was wanted for probation violation.”

A verified business page for Sue Warren Cleaning on the business directory website Manta was linked in the ABC News report from June 1, 2012. The page listed the business at a location in Elyria, Ohio, and displayed negative reviews that appeared to refer to Warren’s arrest. 

All of the reviews were posted between May 31 to June 2, suggesting users wrote them after learning the news of Warren’s 2012 arrest. The reviews did not feature the year they were posted in the timestamp. 

One negative review of Warren’s cleaning business read, “This woman is a complete criminal, breaking into homes and then demanding payment. I hope the judge throws the book at her.” 

However, another user wrote, “Sue you can come over and clean my house anytime. I’m very busy & need a good house keeper.”

Claim:

A screenshot shared on social media in February 2026 authentically showed an email from the Epstein files proving that he was Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous creator of Bitcoin.

Rating:

In January and February 2026, the U.S. Department of Jutice (DOJ) began releasing its entire collection of documents related to the late disgraced financier and sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein, in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, 

As members of the public reviewed the files, various rumors about their contents spread online. One such claim circulating on social media alleged that an email written by Epstein proved he was Satoshi Nakamoto, the anonymous creator of Bitcoin. The posts included an image claiming to show the email, which was supposedly sent by Epstein to his associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, in October 2008.

(X user @TheRealSantino)

Snopes readers wrote in to ask whether the email was real.

However, the alleged email was fake. There was no record of it in the files released by the DOJ, and the image shared online contained inconsistencies suggesting it was doctored. 

The files

The alleged email was dated Oct. 31, 2008, and was supposedly sent by Epstein from the address jepstein@financial.net to Ghislaine Maxwell at gmaxwell@terramar.org, with the subject line “RE: Project “Bitcoin” Funding & Whitepaper.”

Its text read as follows:

Hi Bine,

Ghislaine, the “Satoshi” pseudonym is working perfectly.

Our little digital gold mine is ready for the world.

Funding secured.

-Jeffrey

Snopes searched the DOJ’s publicly available repository of files on Epstein using terms found in the email. A search for “Satoshi” returned 24 results, while “Nakamoto” returned 26. However, searches for more specific phrases — such as “Satoshi pseudonym,” “Our little digital gold mine” or “Project ‘Bitcoin’ Funding & Whitepaper” — returned no results. 

We also searched other repositories hosting the Epstein documents, including the jmail.world site, for the same phrases. Similarly, we found no matches. 

From there, we reviewed all documents that contained references to “Satoshi” and “Nakamoto.”

Those documents included newsletters, emails between Epstein and others discussing cryptocurrencies, informational slide decks on cryptocurrency — at least one of which appeared to present a Bitcoin investment opportunity — and academic articles on technologies related to cryptocurrency.  

None of the documents matched the purported email. As such, we concluded that it was not present in the files.

The image

Meanwhile, the image contained several inconsistencies suggesting it was doctored. For example, below the email’s date and subject line, there were two different “To:” lines — one filled with Epstein’s email and another filled with the subject. A duplicated “To:” line was not present in other emails included in the files.

(X user @TheRealSantino)

Additionally, Maxwell’s email address was linked to the TerraMar Project via the domain terramar.org. While Maxwell founded the organization to “encourage conservancy of the high seas” in 2012, according to Business Insider, the email in question was supposedly sent years earlier. 

Snopes also searched Epstein repositories for other emails beginning with “Hi Bine,” which we interpreted as a nickname for Maxwell. Again, no such emails existed. Referring to Maxwell by the nickname “Bine” exactly once in an email and never again seems improbable, providing further evidence that the email was fake. 

Snopes was unable to determine who created the fabricated email at the time of publication.

After the U.S. Department of Justice released 3.5 million more documents related to the case of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein on Jan. 30, 2026, a claim emerged that Kevin Spacey — the actor who faced multiple allegations of sexual misconduct when the #MeToo movement started in 2017 — had announced he would “be open to playing” Epstein in a biographical movie. 

For example, an X user posted the rumor on Feb. 4 (archived): “Kevin Spacey says he is ‘open to playing Jeffrey Epstein in a biopic.’”

The rumor appeared on Threads and Facebook. 

While some readers appeared to take the rumor Spacey said he would play Epstein in a movie as fact, internet searches uncovered no evidence that he’d made such a statement. Had this been the case, reputable news outlets would have reported on it. 

Rather, the rumor about Spacey offering to play Epstein originated with WKM NEWS (archived) — an Instagram account that describes its output as being humorous or satirical in nature. The account was labeled “Satire/Parody” and its bio stated: “The most untrusted news source. Fake News | parody account.”

The rumor spread months after the actor called on X to release all the files related to Epstein (archived):

In 2024, Spacey said on television he’d once flown on a plane that belonged to Epstein, and that there were “young girls” on that plane. The plane was taking him on a humanitarian trip to South Africa with the Clinton Foundation, the actor said.

Snopes previously addressed a satirical rumor from WKM NEWS that claimed President Donald Trump told the United Nations General Assembly “it burns when I pee” during a speech.

For background, here is why we alert readers to rumors created by sources that call their output humorous or satirical.

Was Ilhan Omar’s suspected attacker on her ‘payroll,’ as CBS allegedly reported? Don’t be fooled

Feb. 1, 2026

The claim originated from a social media account known to concoct outright false or misleading h …

Read More

Christensen, Laerke. “Don’t Fall for This Photo of Trump, Epstein, Young Female and Children.” Snopes, 2 Feb. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/photo-trump-epstein-children/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Dapcevich, Madison. “Photos of Trump Alongside Diddy, Epstein Are Real.” Snopes, 6 Dec. 2024, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/photos-trump-combs-epstein/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Deng, Rae. “17 Rumors about Epstein Associate Ghislaine Maxwell.” Snopes, 23 July 2025, https://www.snopes.com//collections/epstein-ghislaine-maxwell-rumors/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Deng, Rae. “Don’t Fall for This Image of Epstein with Nigel Farage.” Snopes, 3 Feb. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/image-epstein-nigel-farage/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Epstein Library. Department of Justice, https://www.justice.gov/epstein. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

“From Left, American Real Estate Developer Donald Trump and His…” Getty Images, 10 Dec. 2019, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/from-left-american-real-estate-developer-donald-trump-and-news-photo/1192977790. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

“Ghislaine Maxwell, Naomi Campbell, Donald Trump and Melania Knauss…” Getty Images, 23 Aug. 2019, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/ghislaine-maxwell-naomi-campbell-donald-trump-and-melania-news-photo/1169684623. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Liles, Jordan. “Is the Elon Musk and Ghislaine Maxwell Photo Real?” Snopes, 25 Apr. 2022, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/musk-maxwell-photo/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

“Portrait of, from Left, American Real Estate Developer Donald Trump,…” Getty Images, 6 Dec. 2019, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/portrait-of-from-left-american-real-estate-developer-donald-news-photo/1192330903. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

“Portrait of, from Left, Future Married Couple Fashion Model Melania…” Getty Images, 3 July 2020, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/portrait-of-from-left-future-married-couple-fashion-model-news-photo/1254069355. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.

Winter, Emery. “Epstein Files Photo Shows Trapdoor Opening to Water. Here’s Its Likely Purpose.” Snopes, 6 Feb. 2026, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/epstein-files-trapdoor-photo/. Accessed 6 Feb. 2026.