See what the Full Evidence Report adds
A free check surfaces the main signals. The paid report separates every checkable claim, explains what the sources establish, identifies presentation risks and gives you practical next checks.
Material checked
“Take 2,000 mg of vitamin C every day. It completely prevents colds, cuts recovery time in half, and the NHS now recommends this dose. Share this health update.”
Source evidence
The sources answer different questions: current NHS guidance covers public advice and dosage; Cochrane evaluates prevention and duration across controlled trials; NIH adds dose-limit and safety context.
| Source | What it establishes | Role |
|---|---|---|
| NHS — Common cold | There is little evidence vitamin C prevents colds or speeds recovery. | Official guidance |
| NHS — Vitamin C | Adults need 40 mg daily; amounts above 1,000 mg can cause side effects. | Official guidance |
| Cochrane review | No prevention effect in the ordinary population; modest duration effects with regular use; no consistent therapeutic effect. | Systematic review |
| NIH ODS fact sheet | The adult tolerable upper intake level is 2,000 mg, with relevant cautions. | Official summary |
Sources are links for the reader to open and inspect. A report should not be treated as a substitute for reading the underlying evidence.
Claim-by-claim findings
| Checkable claim | Status | Coverage and reason |
|---|---|---|
| Vitamin C completely prevents colds. | Contradicted | Sufficient coverage. NHS guidance and the Cochrane review do not support this universal claim. |
| It cuts recovery time in half. | Contradicted | Sufficient coverage. Cochrane reports modest average duration reductions with regular use—not 50%—and no consistent benefit when treatment starts after symptoms. |
| The NHS recommends 2,000 mg daily. | Contradicted | Sufficient coverage. NHS guidance gives a 40 mg adult requirement and warns about effects above 1,000 mg. |
| 2,000 mg is appropriate for any reader. | Needs context | Partial coverage. NIH lists 2,000 mg as an adult upper limit, not a universal recommendation; individual circumstances matter. |
Public-source similarity
No meaningful public-source match established. Common supplement claims and “share this health update” are not distinctive enough to establish an origin. The factual claims can still be checked when authorship remains unknown.
Public-source similarity is a limited web comparison, not a comprehensive plagiarism scan or evidence of intent.
Risk signals
- Absolute certainty: “completely prevents” is stronger than the evidence.
- Misleading precision: “half” has no cited study, population or treatment timing.
- Vague authority: the NHS is named without a page, date or quotation.
- Universal dosage: a high dose is promoted without personal safety context.
These are communication and safety signals, not proof of deliberate deception.
Uncertainty and limits
- The post does not define age group, regular use, treatment timing or “recovery”.
- Population research cannot decide whether a dose is suitable for one person.
- No original post URL or evidence for the alleged NHS attribution was supplied.
- The report cannot determine whether the author misunderstood evidence or intentionally overstated it.
What to verify next
What you gain beyond the free check
The Full Evidence Report turns a single result into an inspectable decision trail: separated claims, coverage labels, source reasoning, risk signals, uncertainty and concrete verification steps. Automated analysis assists the process; it does not make the result infallible.