Tag: General News

A recent video shared on Facebook warns of “extremely disturbing information,” but the truth is much less sensational. 

“The entire of country of Switzerland has received packages, mostly around the nuclear power plants,” a man says in the Oct. 25 video, recounting what he describes as a report from a subscriber. “There are 5 million Swiss that have received iodine tablets in the mail yesterday or actually today, the 25th of October 2023, so she says the government must be worried about something.”

He then says that iodine tablets “are used for nuclear war” and asks if that’s a “good sign, 5 million people getting iodine tablets before the outbreak of nuclear war.” 

This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

In reality, Switzerland distributes iodine pills every decade to residents living within 50 kilometers (31.1 miles) of one of the country’s three nuclear power plants. If a radiation emergency occurred at the plants, taking the pills would protect the people from thyroid cancer. (The iodine pills, technically potassium iodide, stops the thyroid gland from absorbing radioactive iodine that may leak from nuclear plants.)  

“The campaign may seem like a Cold War relic to some,” Bloomberg News reported Oct. 28. “Newly arrived expatriates are often startled to be handed a voucher for their pills when they register at the town hall. But the idea is that sirens would sound in the event of a nuclear accident so that people could take a dose before any fallout reaches them.”

This has been going on “for years,” Reuters reported in 2021. “In 2014, the last time Switzerland handed out iodine, it gave tablets to nearly 5 million people in 1.9 million households.”

We rate claims that Switzerland is distributing iodine tablets to prepare for a looming nuclear war False.

 

In the 1930s, the United States was plagued by extreme heat waves and drought, bringing about the era known as the Dust Bowl. But was that time significantly warmer than today’s climate, as social media posts claim?

A Sept. 26 Facebook post said “1936: Much Hotter Than 2023,” with a photo of two U.S. maps depicting high temperatures across the country in 1936 and 2023.

Red dots on the maps marked cities with temperatures over 100° Fahrenheit and purple dots marked cities with temperatures over 110° F. The 1936 map showed the U.S. covered in red and purple dots, whereas the 2023 map was more sparse, giving the impression that 1936 was the hotter year.

(Screengrab from Facebook)

This post was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

The post did not name a source for the maps comparing U.S. temperatures in 1936 and 2023, so it is unclear how this data was collected or whether it’s accurate. Our reverse-image searches through Google Images, Yandex and Tineye could not help us determine where the image originated.

Regardless, the post paints a misleading picture of the country’s climate 87 years ago as it compares with today.

Summer 1936 was unusually warm, especially with arid conditions in the Great Plains and Midwest exacerbating the heat. Many of the high temperature records set that year in the region still hold today, the National Weather Service reported.

However, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration data shows that in the contiguous U.S., the first nine months of 2023 were 1.64°F warmer than January through September 1936. (An agency spokesperson said October data is still being reviewed.)

Globally, summer 2023 was the hottest on record, NASA reported.

Climate scientists say that the 1930s heat waves in the U.S. are often singled out to rebut the existence of global climate change.

“In climate science, trend is the true indicator of climate change, not a particular cherry-picked year. Recent summers in the United States are some of the worst summers we have on record,” said Randall Cerveny, a geographical sciences professor at Arizona State University.

There’s abundant evidence that the Earth is warming exponentially because of human-caused climate change.

Heat waves, or persistent periods of unusually hot days, are becoming more frequent and intense in the U.S. and other parts of the world. 2023 has already broken several heat records, and climate scientists estimate that it will likely be the hottest on record globally.

We rate the claim that 1936 in the U.S. was “much hotter than 2023” False.

Americans have soured on the economy, partly because of unusually high inflation under President Joe Biden. Vice President Kamala Harries tried to change that perception on CBS’ “60 Minutes.”

During an Oct. 29 interview, Harris said Biden came into office during the coronavirus pandemic, but “because of our economic policies, we now are reducing inflation.”

Inflation is at 3.7% year over year, down significantly from its nearly 9% peak in June 2022.

But how strong is Harris’ argument that this drop is “because of our economic policies”? That’s less certain.

The White House gave PolitiFact no supporting evidence for cause and effect, but we checked with economists and found a few Biden policies that may have had some marginal disinflationary effect. 

One is an oil sell-off from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. That was designed to take the edge off oil price spikes, which helped push inflation higher in 2022’s first half. Today, the amount of oil in the reserve is 45% lower than it was when Biden came into office.

Another contributor may be a law that took effect Jan. 1, 2023, capping insulin at $35 for Medicare beneficiaries.

“I do not know how much these measures have actually reduced overall consumer price inflation, but they probably contributed modestly to lowering or limiting the rise of some consumer prices,” said Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution, a think tank.

However, other elements of the Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022, are being phased in over several years and could not have had a significant impact during 2022 and 2023, when inflation was falling. Provisions such as enabling Medicare to negotiate prices for certain drugs or subsidizing clean energy may one day help keep prices down, but they will take time to apply.

By contrast, the biggest lever in slowing inflation is something the White House does not control: the Federal Reserve Board. 

The Fed acts independently of the executive branch.

When the Fed raises interest rates, economic growth slows and demand cools, lowering prices. On March 16, 2022, the Fed’s main interest rate was 0.8%. Today it’s 5.33%, the highest in a decade and a half. The Fed’s rate increases have rippled throughout the economy. 

By raising mortgage rates, those increases have “cratered the housing market,” said Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the center-right American Action Forum think tank. And when the housing sector gets hit, he said, that reduces demand for a host of other things such as appliances and home furnishings. As a result, he said, “goods price inflation is almost gone.”

Another factor in declining inflation is also out of any president’s control: oil prices, which have plunged since their summer 2022 peak.

Biden has gotten “a real break on energy prices over the past year,” Holtz-Eakin said.

Part of this relates to a major economic slowdown in China, which has reduced the demand for oil, lowering its price. Lower oil prices have led to lower commodity prices more generally around the globe, Holtz-Eakin said.

Our ruling

Harris said, “Because of our economic policies we now are reducing inflation.”

Inflation has fallen since mid-2022 on Biden’s watch, and some of his policies may have helped marginally. But Harris drew a causal link between White House policies and lower inflation that doesn’t withstand scrutiny.

Economists say the biggest reason for the disinflationary pattern has been something the administration doesn’t control: Federal Reserve rate hikes. An oil price decline and a slowdown in China’s economy, neither of which the administration can control, either, have also sent inflation lower, economists say.

The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.

Abortion rights advocates and anti-abortion campaigns are spending millions in Ohio to persuade voters on Issue 1, a Nov. 7 ballot measure that could dictate abortion access’s future in the Buckeye State.

If passed, Issue 1 would amend the Ohio Constitution and enshrine the right to “make and carry out one’s own reproductive decisions,” including decisions on contraception, fertility treatment, miscarriage care, pregnancy and abortion.

But in an ad shared on Facebook, the opposition campaign argued the measure permits abortion later in pregnancy for reasons having to do with a woman’s finances.

“Legal experts say Issue 1 allows for abortion after viability for mental, emotional and even financial reasons, not just to protect the life of the mother,” said a woman featured in the ad from Protect Women Ohio, a coalition of anti-abortion groups that oppose the amendment. “I’m pro-choice, but Issue 1 goes too far.”  

The ad’s video was flagged as part of Meta’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.)

We found the ad’s claim about an exception for finances goes too far. The proposed amendment says nothing about financial considerations being used to justify abortions later in pregnancy — what anti-abortion groups often call “late-term” abortions.

Rather, the measure reiterates a standard similar to that applied under Roe v. Wade, the now-overturned 1973 Supreme Court decision that said abortion access was federally protected: that laws restricting abortion include exceptions for the mother’s “life or health.”

Legal experts told PolitiFact that the argument that “financial reasons” would be considered a part of “health” is a stretch and goes beyond existing case law.

Bringing back a standard near-identical to Roe’s

After Roe v. Wade was overturned in June 2022, Ohio’s six-week abortion ban temporarily took effect before a judge paused it. The ban is pending review by the state’s Supreme Court.

Issue 1 would re-establish a near-identical standard to what existed under Roe, that “abortion may be prohibited after fetal viability” — the point at which a fetus can survive outside the womb — except if “in the professional judgment of the pregnant patient’s treating physician it is necessary to protect the pregnant patient’s life or health.” 

The ballot measure does not mention finances.

Protect Women Ohio argues that the term “health,” left undefined, is open to a broad interpretation. The group cited two 1970s Supreme Court cases that addressed whether the term “health” in abortion laws was “unconstitutionally vague.” 

In both cases, the court ruled it was not vague. But along with a third opinion from 1995, the rulings described “health” more expansively.

“Medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors — physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age — relevant to the wellbeing of the patient,” 1973’s Doe v. Bolton decision says. “All these factors may relate to health. This allows the attending physician the room he needs to make his best medical judgment.”

This ruling “effectively made abortion legal through all nine months of pregnancy for almost any reason,” said Amy Natoce, press secretary for Protect Women Ohio. “Certainly finances are ‘relevant to the wellbeing of the patient,’ and you could argue they fall under the ‘familial health’ exception.”

Mary Ziegler, an abortion historian and law professor at University of California, Davis, told us anti-abortion groups have long argued about health exceptions for abortion, saying the term is too broad and essentially means a person can have the procedure for any reason.

But this interpretation differs from how most people, including physicians, have understood the term, she said.

Jessie Hill, a Case Western Reserve University law professor who is involved in litigation against Ohio’s abortion restrictions, said the Doe v. Bolton ruling comprises factors that may be involved in medical judgment, but doesn’t define “health.”

The case “simply held that a Georgia statute was not unconstitutionally vague,” Capital University constitutional law professor Dan Kobil said. “It did not hold that the Roe standard required such a broad definition,” citing a supporting opinion from Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. 

Post-viability abortions are rare and are therefore rarely litigated, Hill said.

Only about 1% of abortions take place after 21 weeks, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data shows. The Ohio Department of Health reports similar numbers.

None of the court cases or legal analysis Protect Women Ohio shared mentioned financial circumstances as something the court could, or has, considered as part of a mother’s health. 

The legal experts we spoke with agreed that previous case law could be used to argue that “health” goes beyond the physical and into mental and emotional risks, but finances? That would be a challenging legal argument.

“I cannot imagine a court taking the term health and trying to distort it into an economic consideration,” Kobil said. 

Our ruling

An ad from Protect Women Ohio claims that Issue 1 would allow for post-viability abortions for “financial reasons.” 

The proposed constitutional amendment does not mention a post-viability abortion exception for financial reasons. And experts say existing legal precedent doesn’t support such an exception.

The law would allow abortion restrictions later in pregnancy, as long as there were exceptions for the “life” and “health” of the mother.

“Health” has been subject to more broad interpretations by the court than just physical health, but PolitiFact found no evidence that finances have been included in that broader understanding and experts said they find no clear precedent for that.

We rate this claim False. 

PolitiFact Reporter Samantha Putterman contributed to this report.