From a human-made virus to vaccine conspiracy theories, Tanya Lewis, associate editor of Scientific American magazine, rounds up the most insidious false claims about the pandemic 1 . The world is also fighting a different kind of epidemic: misinformation. This “infodemic,” as harmful as COVID-19 itself, leads people to minimize the severity of the disease, and ignore public health advice, in favor of unproven treatments or “cures.”
Tanya Lewis, points to a recent survey by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation and Gallup (an American nonprofit foundation dedicated to fostering informed and engaged communities) according to which four in five Americans say that the dissemination of information Online erroneousness is the biggest problem facing the media 1 . Even with widely available evidence to the contrary, beliefs are difficult to change. Here are some of the most insidious falsehoods about the pandemic and why they’re wrong.
Lewis focuses his article on the United States, however, the similarities in other latitudes are astonishing, which motivates the reproduction of his article in some of its most relevant passages and the addition of bibliographical citations that reflect the concern on the subject in our environment 2, 3 .
| 1. The virus was the result of engineering in a laboratory in China |
As we know, the pathogen first emerged in Wuhan, China. President Donald Trump and others have claimed, without evidence, that it began in a lab there, and some believe it was designed as a biological weapon 1 .
> Why it’s false: US intelligence agencies have categorically denied the possibility that the virus was engineered in a laboratory. This is in line with the broad scientific consensus that COVID-19 was not man-made or genetically modified.
> Why some believe it: A scapegoat is being sought for the immense suffering and economic consequences caused by COVID-19, and China, a foreign country and competitor to the US, is an easy target. Because accidental releases of pathogens in the laboratory are unlikely, but not impossible, this provides sufficient legitimacy to support the narrative that China intentionally engineered the virus to trigger the pandemic 1 .
| 2. COVID-19 is no worse than the seasonal flu |
This was also a statement by D. Trump, which minimized the seriousness of COVID-19 1 .
> Why it’s false: The precise death rate from COVID-19 infection is difficult to measure, but epidemiologists suspect it is much higher than that of the flu: between 0.5 and 1% compared to 0.1% for the flu. flu seasonal influenza. The CDC estimates that the latter causes between 12,000 to 61,000 deaths per year in the US. In contrast, as of mid-September, COVID-19 had already caused 200,000 deaths in that country. The coronavirus is not “just a flu .
> Why some believe it: Because certain “opinion leaders” continue to say it, even though reality denies it. In contrast, reported deaths from COVID-19 are likely to be underestimated 1 .
| 3. No need to wear a mask |
Despite a strong consensus among public health authorities that masks limit coronavirus transmission, many people have refused to wear them 1 .
> Why it’s false: Face masks have long been known to be an effective means of what epidemiologists call source control. An article published in The Lancet analyzed more than 170 studies and concluded that masks can prevent COVID-19 infection 4 . It has also been widely established that people can become infected and spread COVID-19 without developing symptoms, so wearing a mask can prevent asymptomatic people from transmitting the virus 5 .
> Why some people believe it: Initial guidance on masks was confusing and inconsistent, suggesting that the general public did not need to wear masks unless they had symptoms of an infection. The shortage of high-quality surgical and N95 masks partly fueled the idea that these should be reserved for healthcare workers. Even though face masks are now especially recommended or required, there are those who still refuse to wear them because they consider it emasculating or a violation of their civil liberties 1 .
| 4. In the US, the rich elites are using the virus to profit from vaccines |
In the book and movie Plandemic , Judy Mikovits claims, without basis, that the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci, and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, could be using their power to benefit from a vaccine COVID-19. Without providing evidence, Plandemic claims that the virus was created in a laboratory and that the use of masks “activates its own virus.” Various anti-vaccine groups shared the video of a section of the film that was viewed more than eight million times on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram before being removed 8 .
| 5. Hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment |
It all started when a small study in France suggested that hydroxychloroquine could be effective in treating the disease. Some people have continued to promote the drug despite growing evidence that it does not benefit COVID-19 patients 1 .
> Why it’s false: Several studies have shown that hydroxychloroquine does not protect against COVID-19 in those who are exposed. The FDA initially authorized its emergency use, but later warned against its use due to the risk of heart problems and ultimately revoked its authorization. In June, the US National Institutes of Health stopped its clinical trial, saying that although it was not harmful to patients, it provided no benefit.
> Why some people believe it: Because initial reports suggested that hydroxychloroquine could be a potentially promising drug, and many people are likely to believe the first thing they learn about a topic, a phenomenon called anchoring bias 1 . Hydroxychloroquine has no therapeutic role in patients with COVID-19.
| 6. The increase in cases in the US is the result of increased testing |
> Why it’s false: Because hospitalizations and deaths in the US increased along with case detection, providing evidence that the increase in positive tests reflects a real increase in cases 1 .
> Why some people believe it: It would seem logical to ask if more cases are simply being detected because more testing is done. However, the evolution of the pandemic in the US shows a direct relationship between the proportion of positive tests, hospitalization and mortality rates. Similar trends are officially reported in AMBA regarding the relationship between confirmed cases and deaths 9 .
There is enough evidence that “testing and testing” is not the way. Test yes, but to whom, with what type of test, and for what purpose? 10 . In our environment, the Detect plan is aimed precisely at detecting cases among contacts of a confirmed case, in order to isolate/treat them, and "cut the chain of transmission." Possibly there has been insufficient application of the Detect plan, but that would not be improved by universalizing the tests, which also have a relatively high cost, and which, when generalized, decrease their predictive value.
| 7. Herd immunity will protect us if we let the virus spread through the population |
Early in the pandemic, some speculated that the United Kingdom and Sweden were planning to let the coronavirus circulate through their populations until they reached herd immunity, the point at which enough people are immune to the virus and can no longer spread. This was denied as an official strategy by the governments of both nations 1 .
> Why it’s false: There is a fundamental flaw in this approach: experts estimate that approximately 60 to 70% of the population would need to be infected by COVID-19 for herd immunity to be possible. But given the disease’s high mortality rate, letting it infect many people could lead to millions of deaths. This is what happened during the 1918 influenza pandemic, in which it is estimated that at least 50 million people died. The COVID-19 death rate in the UK is among the highest in the world. Sweden, for its part, has had significantly more deaths than neighboring countries, and its economy has suffered despite the lack of a lockdown, which is now being reversed.
> Why some people believe it: Because they want to return to normal life, and without a widely available COVID-19 vaccine, the only way to achieve herd immunity is to let a substantial number of people get sick. Some have speculated that we may have already achieved herd immunity, but population antibody studies have shown that even the most affected regions are far from that threshold 1 .
| 8. A COVID-19 vaccine will not be safe |
Worrying reports have emerged that many people may refuse to receive a COVID-19 vaccine once it becomes available. Conspiracy theories about possible vaccines have circulated among anti-vaccine groups and in viral videos. In Plandemic , Mikovits 8 falsely claims that any COVID-19 vaccine “will kill millions” and that other vaccines have done so. The majority of the population supports vaccination, but there are some voices, spread through social networks, that publicly oppose vaccines (and not just COVID-19). Although anti-vaccine groups on the networks are smaller than pro-vaccination groups, they are more interconnected and able to influence undecided people.
> Why it is false: Because vaccines save millions of lives every year. According to the WHO and the responsible agencies in the US and most European countries, a proposed vaccine must go through three phases of experimental and clinical testing in a large number of people to demonstrate that it is safe and effective, before being approved 11-13 . Leading vaccine candidates for COVID-19 are currently being tested in large-scale trials in tens of thousands of people.
> Why some people believe it: There are good reasons to be careful about the safety of any new vaccine or treatment. However, previous safety trials of leading vaccine candidates found no major adverse effects and larger safety and efficacy trials are currently underway. Nine pharmaceutical companies developing vaccines have pledged to “support science” and not release one unless it has been proven safe and effective 1 .
Before the pandemic the issue was already installed. On the one hand, there are those who maintain that the anti-vaccine movement must be denied so as not to strengthen it; and on the other those who say that the time has come to fight it to raise awareness. There is an incontrovertible fact: “Vaccines were and are, after drinking water, the most important elements for reducing illnesses and deaths” 14. The similarities between what Lewis 1 commented and what happens in our region should not be surprising. .
Also note that something as neutral as a vaccine has different sides of opinion depending on the previous political position. Leaving aside the positions of world leaders, sociologist Ernesto Calvo 15 demonstrates that this bias even reaches a dimension as intimate as the perception of risk. To demonstrate this, he cites surveys that show that voters of presidents who minimized the coronavirus (Trump, Bolsonaro, López Obrador) perceive less chances of getting sick than those who voted for the opposition, and more chances of being out of work.
On the other hand, followers of presidents who implemented responsible health policies fear the virus more than unemployment. As Calvo says, it is one thing not to believe in climate change and another not to feel hot 14 . Again, a prepared, attentive, educated, difficult, authentically cultured public will resist the maneuvers of the manipulator. Hence the importance of culture, hence the importance of the critical consciousness of society 3 .
Author : Eduardo L. De Vito, Pulmonology Service, Alfredo Lanari Medical Research Institute, UBA, Buenos Aires, Argentina
