Protecting your social media feeds from election misinformation
We hope you're having a great start to your week. In today's newsletter we have tips from Vox about election misinformation, an analysis of Far Right groups in Europe, as well as our Digital Health Lab Director writing about health information equity at the scale of the internet. As always, our in-house doctor, Dr. Seema Yasmin, has some important information about COVID-19. This week she's tackling masks and nose swab testing as a second wave looms over many countries. Enjoy, and don't forget to share the Checklist with your friends and family!
Your COVID-19 questions
Journalist and medical doctor, Dr. Seema Yasmin shares weekly highlights from Meedan's public health journalism tool, learnaboutcovid19.org.
Do masks heighten the risk of 'antibiotic resistant strains of pneumonia' or the risk of developing pneumonia at all?
Dr. Seema says: "No, in fact masks can help protect the wearer and those around them from bacterial infections, as well as COVID-19. Even more interesting is the idea that surgical masks might not completely protect us from other people’s germs, but might greatly reduce the amount of virus we are exposed to. This means that by wearing a mask we are exposed to low doses of the virus which could result in infection, but infection that is either mild or completely asymptomatic. This harkens back to the pre-vaccine days, centuries ago in Asia, when a technique called variolation was used to protect people from infection. Scabs from smallpox patients were blown up the nose of healthy people who then developed a much more mild version of the disease, and on recovery, had immunity to the infection. We need more studies comparing countries with universal masking with those that don’t have widespread masking to see if this is the case, but some studies in animals have shown it to be true. If so, evidence that masks reduce the severity of disease and lead to a greater proportion of asymptomatic infections might be a stopgap measure as we wait for a vaccine." (Read more on what our experts say here)
Can nose swab testing for COVID-19 be harmful?
Dr. Seema says: "There are two kinds of nose swabbing techniques used to test for COVID-19. The first involves angling a swab upwards into the nose and swirling the swab around the front part of the nostrils. This is straightforward and a person can do this on themselves. The second technique is an NP or nasopharyngeal swab, where a longer swab is pushed straight back through the nose towards the back of the throat. A healthcare worker usually does this kind of swab since the technique collects material from the back of the throat and not just the inner part of the nostrils. Both techniques are commonly used to test for a variety of infections. Recent false messages on social media warning that nostril or NP swabbing damages the brain are dangerous, because they might motivate people to avoid getting tested. Testing for COVID-19 remains key to controlling the pandemic, because when testing is widely available (and results are offered soon after) it helps both the individual isolate quickly and helps contact tracers identify as many contacts as possible. There are other ways to diagnose COVID-19, including blood tests, but nose swabs are typically used for PCR testing and it’s important to reiterate their safety." (Read more on what our experts say here)
Top stories
How to guard your social feeds against election misinformation (Vox)
Whether you're in Nigeria, Myanmar or the United States, chances are there's an election coming up for you in the near future. Vox put together a guide to dealing with election misinformation, including weeding out people that spread false claims and tailoring user settings to prioritize good content on your social feeds.
"Your social feeds are most shaped by who you follow, so following reputable sources of information and news is probably your best bet. Unfollowing known sources of misinformation, even if that includes close friends and family, is probably worth considering as well. If you want to get ahead on fact-checking, you might consider following fact-checking organizations directly, ensuring their fact-checks are in your feed. You can check out this list of organizations that have signed on to the fact-checking principles established by the International Fact-checking Network, or this list of US-focused fact-checkers from American University." — Rebecca Heilweil, Vox
Are far right groups really just about spreading conspiracy theories and misinformation? (Open Democracy)
A recent analysis of leading Far Right groups in Europe suggests the threat of those groups using misinformation to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic may be overplayed. Research conducted at the European University Institute in Florence suggests that some Far Right groups are more likely to engage in ‘resilience-building’ activities than actually spread misinformation.
"The findings suggest that Far Right groups were less interested in spreading misinformation and fear about the virus than they were in promoting themselves as responsible actors in a time of crisis. In fact, they were often highly critical of national governments for not implementing stronger lockdown measures earlier and would showcase their community work supporting groups they saw as vulnerable to COVID-19." — Richard McNeil Willson, Open Democracy
What’s new at Meedan
How we’re pursuing health equity at internet scale
Digital Health Lab director Nat Gyenes writes about Meedan's B2B fact-checking model: "We are testing a hypothesis that a rapid-response process, where a team of health experts distill scientific evidence based on requests made by fact-checkers—requests that other communciators around the world may also have— can meet the needs of audiences searching for health information online more efficiently, at larger scales, across regions, and directly where searching takes place."