It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.
This study tests whether the number (1 vs. 2) and the source (another user vs. the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]) of corrective responses affect successful reduction of misperceptions. Using an experimental design, our results suggest that while a single correction from another user did not reduce misperceptions, the CDC on its own could correct misinformation.
The article discusses the impact of fake news spreading in the medical industry through social media platforms and its effects on public health. It suggests the ways to put an end to the spread of misinformation about health, the need for intervention, and the implementation of limitations regarding information sharing is also reported.
In an antifluoridation case study, we explored digital pandemics and the social spread of scientifically inaccurate health information across the Web, and we considered the potential health effects. Using the social networking site Facebook and the open source applications Netvizz and Gephi, we analyzed the connectedness of antifluoride networks as a measure of social influence, the social diffusion of information based on conversations about a sample scientific publication as a measure of spread, and the engagement and sentiment about the publication as a measure of attitudes and behaviors.
In the wake of the nuclear disaster in Japan in March 2011, the California Department of Public Health disseminated information that use of KI was not indicated and could cause significant side effects in people with allergies to iodine or shellfish. The Department was given the AAAAI Practice Paper on "Risk of severe allergic reactions from the use of potassium iodide for radiation emergencies" (Sicherer SH, JACI 2004;114:1395-7), and information was corrected on the website. This prompted interest in whether other states had posted incorrect information.
Recently, grain consumption, especially wheat, has been blamed for obesity, diabetes mellitus, other chronic diseases, food addiction, and impaired brain function. Popular press authors and food bloggers claim that eliminating grains is essential for optimal health. A review of nutrition and medical literature reveals that there is little evidence to support claims that wheat causes these conditions. Where scant data do exist, correlations are simply associations and do not prove causality. It is important for food and nutrition professionals to use scientific evidence regarding grains and health to dispel misinformation and misconceptions.
How does health misinformation become part of the American and Canadian vernacular? Twenty-three databases were searched for articles discussing university freshmen weight gain. Research articles were examined for methodology, number and gender of the participants and weight gain. Popular press articles were reviewed for the types of information published: expert/anecdotal, weight gain, nutrition, exercise, health and alcohol. A timeline of article publication dates was generated.
Food allergy affects an estimated 8% of children and 3% of adults in the United States. Food‐allergic individuals increasingly use the web for medical information. We sought to determine the educational quality of food allergy YouTube videos.