FactCheck.org's Weekly Update

There is no evidence that vaccines could cause harm to people who already have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 or have become ill with the disease COVID-19. On the contrary, recent studies show the vaccine gives an important immunity boost to those previously infected and suggest that one dose might be enough. 

Stanford Medicine says it “strongly supports the use of face masks to control the spread of COVID-19.” Yet viral stories falsely claim a “Stanford study” showed that face masks are unsafe and ineffective against COVID-19. The paper is a hypothesis, not a study, from someone with no current affiliation with Stanford.

We look at what is known about the rare clotting conditions associated with the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, their frequency and the risks of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines authorized for use were found to be safe and effective in clinical trials and real-world conditions. A professor in Ireland baselessly claims in a video circulating on social media that they are not, and that those who get the vaccines will die as a result within several years.

A viral video features a doctor making dubious claims about COVID-19 vaccines and treatments at a forum hosted by Idaho’s lieutenant governor. Dr. Ryan Cole claims mRNA vaccines cause cancer and autoimmune diseases, but the lead author of the paper on which Cole based that claim told us there is no evidence mRNA vaccines cause those ailments.

FactCheck.org has again been nominated for Webby Awards in the category for Websites and Mobile Sites: News & Politics.

Republicans have called for Rep. Maxine Waters’ censure or outright removal from Congress — claiming she was inciting violence prior to the verdict in the George Floyd case. Here we provide her full remarks in context.

Several independent studies show strong bipartisan support for many of the main spending components of the $2.7 trillion American Jobs Plan. Still, those polls show most Republicans oppose the overall plan, particularly its call for spending to be offset by higher corporate taxes.

An alternate juror in the trial of Derek Chauvin said she initially had “mixed feelings” about jury duty, because of concerns about “disappointing” either side and the possibility of “rioting.” She said she “would have said guilty,” but as an alternate did not participate in the verdict. Social media posts now use her words to erroneously imply that a juror admitted outside pressure was a factor in the verdict.