Question

There are no "viruses," therefore, vaccines carry 100% risk and 0% benefits. Virologists perform experiments to prove "viruses" exist.

Comments

Your source seems to be on baseless claims and lacks proper evidence. Have you considered using a more credible source? Using a graphic on a social media site such as "Bluesky" which lacks any cited sources does not provide valid evidence to support your claim.

Answer 1

The article you used seems to not be based in facts or science. It seems that the article was lacking educational sources.  "Viruses are microscopic entities that have a core of genetic material, either DNA or RNA. The core is covered with a capsid, a protective coat made of protein." https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158179#what-are-viruses

Answer 2

Using a Bluesky post as the basis to support a claim with no evidence and already makes this claim hardly justifiable.

In this article by MedicalNewsToday, which utilizes a multitude of verifiable sources listed at the bottom, writes all about what viruses are and how they work.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158179#sources

In your second claim, you say vaccines carry 100% risk, and zero benefits, which is just the opposite of what has been proven. In this article article by a children's hospital, it does admit that there are some temporary side effects, but the long term benefits of staving off viral sickness vastly outweigh them.

https://www.chop.edu/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/other-vaccine-safety-concerns/are-vaccines-safe

Additionally, the viral outbreaks are proof enough that viruses exist, and if vaccines were the culprit, than unvaccinated people would never get sick.

Comments

I appreciate the way you deconstruct the argument being made. Your sourcing is also very well done. Your step by step breakdown of the article make things clear and easy to understand. Additionally, backing up your argument that vaccines do in fact work with science backed sources is a cherry on top!

---

You did a great job of establishing that the basis of the claim (viruses aren't real) is simply untrue and providing a source for that. It's informative and important especially when addressing potentially harmful misinformation such as viruses not existing and vaccines being a health risk. Additionally, you provide a second source to address the second part of this claim which is about vaccines, and how they don't provide any benefits which has been repeatedly proven untrue. In summary, you used great sources that provide factual and easy-to-understand information.

---

Given your fact-check, how would you rate the claim? False? Misleading? Always mention it in-text and select a rating. Thanks!

---

Great breakdown of why this claim is misleading/false. Working two sources with added info does a great job of backing up your argument, which is excellent for trustworthiness from a reader's standpoint. My only edit would be to classify this claim as false, misleading, etc.

---

This is a wonderful explanation and breakdown of the previous claim and explores various sources on proving the factcheck. Not only did you provide reliable sources, but you did a great job delving into each source and explaining it.

Answer 3

This claim is not true. The source used is unreliable and is also a personal belief claim rather than factual. According to Medical News Today viruses are microscopic particles in animals, humans, and other living organisms, and they can cause diseases and other health issues. They are made of genetic material and are able to replicate inside of the host. Vaccines are a way to teach your body how to detect the virus and beat it. So yes it has been proven that viruses are real and that vaccines are the best way we have to prevent against them.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158179

Comments

I love how you brought up a solid new article that comes from trustworthy place to help prove your point, I also like how you bring up just where the false idea comes from.