copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2023-03-13): Animal products are only ever used to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine. It is recognised that this may raise issues of acceptability for some people who do not consume animal products, or those whose faith avoids consumption of products from specific animals. Despite this, many groups recognise the importance of vaccination and advise that vaccines containing prohibited substances can still be accepted. For example, one vegan group has produced detailed information on the various animal contents that are contained or used in vaccines. [...] Even though animal products are used in the development of most vaccines, and some vaccines contain small amounts of animal products, the number of animals used in vaccine development and production is kept to an absolute minimum. Animals and animal products are only used when they are vital for ensuring that the vaccine is safe and effective and their use is highly regulated.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2024-07-23): Types of Vaccine Ingredients Antigens can be considered the active ingredients in vaccines because they are the parts of the vaccine to which an immune response is generated. Most often these components are whole viruses or bacteria, parts of the viruses or bacteria, or products made by bacteria, called toxins. Some vaccines against COVID-19 also use nucleic acids. Learn more about how vaccines are made. [...] Because vaccines are made from viruses and bacteria, some chemicals and cell byproducts used during vaccine production may remain in the final preparation in minute quantities. Some examples include antibiotics, DNA, egg proteins, fetal tissues, formaldehyde, human proteins, and yeast.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2020-09-14): Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccines Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can be administered concomitantly with any other vaccines. See COVID-19 vaccine and immunization information, including interim clinical considerations. [...] Vaccine components can cause allergic reactions in some recipients. Reactions can be local or systemic and can include anaphylaxis or anaphylactic-like responses. A previous severe allergic reaction to any vaccine, regardless of the component suspected of being responsible for the reaction, is a contraindication to future receipt of the vaccine. Vaccine components responsible for reactions can include adjuvants, animal proteins, antibiotics, the vaccine antigen, preservatives (e.g., thimerosal), stabilizers (e.g., gelatin), or yeast.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2024-06-20): Many people choose a vegetarian (no meat) or vegan (no animal products) diet for its health benefits.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2021-09-10): Vegandale organizers did not respond to a request for comment, but their policy reflects a long-standing argument within the vegan community over the ethics of vaccinations, with a vocal group denouncing them as non-vegan due to animal testing and because some vaccines contain animal byproducts. That includes voices from conspiracy theorists like German vegan cookbook author Atilla Hildmann. In fact, in England, vegans are considered by law as a protected class, afforded the same exceptions as those who say religion prohibits them from certain practices, including vaccinations. That’s led some U.K. anti-vaxxers to feign veganism as a strategy to avoid a jab. None of the three U.S.-approved COVID-19 vaccines contain animal products, though laws require animal testing before medications reach the market. Animal rights activists and proponents of veganism at PETA have advised vegans to get vaccinated, as there is no better option right now and staying healthy is the best path in continuing to support animal rights. Though breakthrough cases are possible, health experts point to data revealing that vaccines reduce the risk of severe illness, hospitalization, and death by roughly 90 percent, even as the more contagious delta variant wreaks havoc across the nation. [...] "As far as the vaccine not being vegan?" he says. "If there’s a better option, let me know."
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2023-04-17): The manufacturer can be contacted for information regarding the suitability of the product for vegans, although they may not be able to guarantee or differentiate the specific sources of animal-derived ingredients. Veganism avoids using animals ‘as far as is practicable and possible’ and sometimes there are no alternatives to prescription medicines containing animal-derived ingredients.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2023-05-30): A fourth COVID-19 vaccine has been authorized in the United States. Called Novavax, it's a more traditional vaccine that uses moth cells and tree bark. Instead of an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer, Moderna) or a viral vector vaccine (Johnson & Johnson), Novavax is a subunit protein vaccine. [...] For example, some are allergic to polyethylene glycol (PEG), an ingredient in the mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) vaccines. There's no polyethylene glycol (PEG) in Novavax. [...] The Novavax COVID-19 vaccine contains a protein (made using moth cells) plus an adjuvant (made from tree bark). An adjuvant is an ingredient added to boost a person's immune response, creating higher levels of antibodies.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2022-07-22): Do Vegans Who Get a COVID-19 Vaccine Abandon Their Moral Principles? Yes — and No. Although the vaccines for COVID-19 that are presently available are being represented as having no animal ingredients, the blood of many thousands of horseshoe crabs is being used to make sure that the vaccines are free of contamination. Although the crab blood is technically not an ingredient of the vaccine, it might as well be. Horseshoe crabs are not really crabs; they are more closely related to spiders and other arachnids than they are to crabs or lobsters. But horseshoe crabs have a complex nervous system and it is very likely that they are sentient, or subjectively aware and able to experience pain. The crabs are captured, placed in racks, and have the tissue around their hearts pierced. Up to 30% of their blood (which is blue) is drained. The process is certainly distressing to the crabs. Although they are returned to the ocean, between 10% and 30% of the crabs die in the bleeding process and after they are returned. Many are re-caught and bled again. Although there is a non-animal alternative to using crab’s blood, that alternative has not been accepted and will not be employed with respect to the COVID-19 vaccines.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2021-02-19): Some of my vegan friends are reluctant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. These vaccines do not contain animal products. Yet animals were used to develop and test them. For instance, early trials involved giving the vaccines to mice and macaque monkeys. So my friends say they feel uncomfortable having a product that uses animals in these ways. [...] Nonetheless, I believe vegans can get the COVID-19 vaccine in good conscience. Let me explain why.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2021-02-21): Are COVID vaccines vegan? Should I get one anyway? An ethicist explains Some of my vegan friends are reluctant to get the COVID-19 vaccine. [...] Nonetheless, I believe vegans can get the COVID-19 vaccine in good conscience. Let me explain why.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2022-01-19): Unlike food products, the list of vaccine ingredients may include products used during the manufacturing process, even if they do not remain in the finished product. Added ingredients are present in very small quantities (usually a few milligrams). Products used in making vaccines or growing the active ingredients may not remain in the final vaccine at all. If they do, they are present only in trace amounts. [...] The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine for COVID-19, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, is made using a modified adenovirus, which is used to carry the genetic code for the coronavirus spike protein. This means that the vaccine is a GMO. The adenovirus has been modified in this way to prevent it from replicating inside the body so that it cannot cause an infection. [...] Members of Muslim or Jewish religious communities may be concerned about using vaccines that contain gelatine from pigs (porcine gelatine). According to Jewish laws, there is no problem with gelatine or any other animal substance if it is used in a product that does not go into the mouth. Some Muslim leaders have also ruled that the use of gelatine in vaccines does not break religious dietary laws, because it is highly purified and it is also injected or inhaled rather than ingested (eaten).
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2023-10-12): The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines have become the first to be approved under emergency use authorization for the prevention of COVID-19 disease. The FDA regulatory processes for new drug approval includes animal testing during the research phases. Unfortunately because of this, no medication can truly be labeled as "vegan". The more appropriate labeling would be "animal-free" (i.e. products not containing any animal-derived ingredients). [...] When it comes to Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine and Spikevax, we were told that they do NOT contain any preservatives, antibiotics, adjuvants, or human- or animal-derived materials. However, the manufacturer gives a disclaimer that they do not test for animal-derived ingredients, so they cannot guarantee animal-derived ingredients are not present. [...] It's important to remember that the COVID-19 vaccines will play a critical role in managing the pandemic and saving lives. At VeganMed we believe that your health should always come first. After all, how can we continue to advocate for animal welfare if we are not fit and healthy ourselves? To this end, we stand behind the philosophy that veganism should be embraced as far as practically possible. A decision to avoid taking a medication or vaccine can be dangerous and all medical decisions should be made after seeking the guidance of your doctor.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2022-06-30): Can I get a COVID-19 vaccine if I’m vegan? [...] Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain animal-derived ingredients? The vaccines that are likely to be available to Australians soonest – those made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca – do not contain any animal-derived ingredients, though animal-derived materials may have been used in the production process. It is possible that future COVID-19 vaccines will contain animal-derived ingredients. An example of such an ingredient is shark squalene – an oil derived from the livers of sharks – which is sometimes added to make a vaccine better at stimulating an immune response. It should be possible to know whether a future vaccine contains animal-derived ingredients if and when it is approved for use, and at that point, it may be possible to opt for a vaccine that does not contain them on ethical grounds. Again, this is something you should discuss with your health-care provider.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2024-08-30): People with egg allergy may receive any flu vaccine (egg-based or non-egg-based) that is otherwise appropriate for their age and health status. [...] Most flu vaccines today are produced using an egg-based manufacturing process and thus contain a small amount of egg protein called ovalbumin.
Claim: Vegans cannot take COVID-19 vaccines because they contain animal products. (Radio caller, 2021-11-30)
Evidence (2023-09-22): Aim: Bristol is considered the vegan capital of the UK. The UK vegan index reveals that Bristol has 360,000 Google searches each month for Vegan content. However, the possible animal source of the medications we prescribe is not commonly contemplated. Medications in the UK must pass through animal trials prior to licensing and therefore cannot be vegan. There are, alternatives available for some medications, that do not contain animal products. The aim of this study is to review the presence of content of animal origin (CAO) in common medicines in Trauma and Orthopaedics (T&O) and explore alternatives. Methods: We evaluated the presence and source of CAO in commonly used medications in T&O practice. The British National Formulary (BNF), our local pharmacy guidelines and the online Summary of Product Characteristics (SPCs) for the medications were reviewed. We also assessed the suitability of current COVID-19 vaccines for patients who have reservations against CAO. Results: All unfractionated or standard heparin is porcine in origin; Fondaparinux is a simple alternative. Cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) manufacture involves the use of lanolin from sheep's wool. Vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) is an alternative with no CAO. All widely available Covid-19 vaccines in the UK are suitable for administration to vegans and all religious faiths. Propofol, widely used as an anaesthetic agent, contains egg proteins.
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2019-09-20): This claim is inaccurate. UK government expenditure on cultural services (measured by Eurostat) is just over half of the EU average. Within the UK, public expenditure in Northern Ireland is less than half than in Scotland, Wales, and England. However, Arts Matter Northern Ireland uses European statistics that reach beyond the arts, and make an invalid comparison between EU figures and public expenditure arts spend within the UK.
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2024-08-06): Change over 12 months 2.2 % 2024 AUG- Release date:
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2023-12-12): It gives the devolved administration an equivalent spending increase for the size of its population, adjusted for the extent to which each service is devolved.
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2024-05-21): It is headlined by a new needs-based funding formula which will also mean that Northern Ireland will get a 24% uplift in the Barnett formula if its funding falls short of its relative need per head. It also contains an immediate £20 million boost to the Executive’s annual capital borrowing powers, which will rise in line with inflation from 2025-26 onwards.
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2023-07-14): ‘There is no funding for a 6% pay uplift to be awarded’ to NHS staff including GPs, BMA Northern Ireland has been told. [...] Dr Black said that BMA is ‘deeply concerned’ at the budget situation in Northern Ireland. ‘We have been told that there is no funding for a pay uplift to be awarded,’ he added. [...] ‘We urge our local politicians to get back to work and engage with the BMA as soon as the assembly is restored to ensure funding is ringfenced so the uplift can be paid as soon as possible, but to also make a commitment to full pay restoration in Northern Ireland.’
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2024-02-05): In December 2023, following discussion with the main parties in Northern Ireland, the UK government outlined a £3.3bn financial package that was conditional on a restored Northern Ireland Executive. Proportionate to the size of the Northern Ireland budget this is a large sum – using a simplified form of the Barnett Formula this would be equivalent to a £96.7bn uplift to England’s public services spending. Without further details it is difficult to be more precise, or indeed identify which financial years this £3.3bn package relates to. Following agreement from the DUP to re-enter power sharing, the secretary of state announced to the House on 31 January that "the money will flow as soon as the new Executive is up and running". 55 hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-01-31/debates/211B60F1-4CC0-43EB-97C3-C38F2ED7FD77/NorthernIrelandExecutiveFormation
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2024-02-22): The challenges facing health and social care in Northern Ireland are significant and multi-faceted. Firstly, the healthcare system must be stabilised, and key to this will be tackling the workforce pressures. The system is losing its most valuable asset at alarming levels. Primary care is the backbone of health care, and it is at breaking point. GPs are handing back their contracts in unprecedented numbers, with a 9% decrease in the number of active GP practices in Northern Ireland from 2014 to 2022.36 Staff are burnt out and feel undervalued, and many have already left. Immediate action must be taken to restore pay parity for nurses, allied health professionals, and other healthcare workers in Northern Ireland as they are the lowest paid in the UK and are yet to be offered a pay uplift for 2023-24.7 Despite demoralisation and frustration, there is enormous willingness among staff to help the healthcare crisis.
Claim: Northern Ireland requires a 660% uplift in government expenditure to be equal to the European Union average of 2.2% (Arts Matter NI, 2019-09-20)
Evidence (2022-03-02): On 20 September 2019, Arts Matter Northern Ireland — an arts advocacy group of professionals, participants and volunteers from NI — claimed in a Facebook post that as a percentage of total government expenditure, public spending on the arts is 2.2% in Europe and 0.1% in Northern Ireland. In addition, Arts Matter NI stated: "If the UK needs 66% uplift to keep pace with Europe, we require 10 times that locally." [...] The claims made by Arts Matter NI make an invalid comparison between expenditure that reaches beyond "arts spend", with Northern Ireland data for arts and culture public expenditure. The claim that Northern Ireland would require an increase of 660% in public expenditure is also invalid. However, the data shows that public expenditure per head in Northern Ireland would need to increase by 105% (from £6.06 to £12.39) to match Scotland, the next highest spend per head in the UK. Furthermore, total government expenditure on cultural services (Eurostat) per head in the UK would need to increase by 45% to match the EU average.
Claim: 77% of working mothers endure some kind of discrimination. (Joeli Brearley, 2016-08-15)
Evidence (2016-08-15): This claim is inaccurate. It is correct for mothers in Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) but the statistic stated on BBC Radio Ulster does not apply to women in Northern Ireland.
Claim: 77% of working mothers endure some kind of discrimination. (Joeli Brearley, 2016-08-15)
Evidence (2016-04-28): 77% of working mothers discriminated against [...] The comprehensive research, carried out in partnership with the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, shows despite 77% of working mothers reporting potentially discriminatory or negative experiences, only around a quarter (28%) raised the issue with their employer, only 3% went through their employer’s internal grievance procedure, and less than 1% pursued a claim to the employment tribunal. [...] Caroline Waters, Deputy Chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: "We simply cannot ignore the true scale of the hidden discrimination that working mothers face. This is unacceptable in modern Britain, and urgent action is needed to ensure women are able to challenge discrimination and unfairness. This is why we are calling on Government to look at the barriers working pregnant women and mothers face in accessing justice.
Claim: 77% of working mothers endure some kind of discrimination. (Joeli Brearley, 2016-08-15)
Evidence (2016-05-02): Pregnant women and new mothers 'face rising discrimination' at work - Published New and expectant mothers are reporting increasing levels of unfair treatment at work, Citizens Advice has said. [...] Recent research by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, external found 77% of mothers reported a negative or possibly discriminatory experience at work during their pregnancy, maternity leave or on their return to work.
Claim: 77% of working mothers endure some kind of discrimination. (Joeli Brearley, 2016-08-15)
Evidence (2021-03-31): Fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that denying women jobs on the basis of motherhood violated their civil rights, systemic bias still exists against working mothers, writes Jean Lee, president and CEO of the Minority Corporate Counsel Association. The situation has worsened in the Covid-19 pandemic and employers need to do more to break down the maternal wall, she says. [...] Phillips vs. Martin Marietta Corp. may have dealt a blow to the so-called maternal wall—the bias and discrimination that mothers face in the workplace. But 50 years after the decision, that wall continues to cast a long shadow over corporate America. [...] But more work remains to ensure this trend becomes the norm, not the exception. The title of our report, "You Can’t Change What You Can’t See," remains truer than ever. And our call to action for corporate leaders across America—to track bias against working mothers, and to hold themselves accountable for preventing it—remains as urgent as it was back in 1971.
Claim: 77% of working mothers endure some kind of discrimination. (Joeli Brearley, 2016-08-15)
Evidence (2022-05-08): In 2015, the most recent large-scale report into pregnancy and maternity discrimination found that 77% of working mums experience discrimination in the workplace and 54,000 women a year lose jobs for getting pregnant. [...] Katie* knew what it felt like to be discriminated against as a working mother. After the birth of her first child, she was made redundant from her job as a buyer for a major supermarket on the eighth month of her maternity leave, and then made to sign an NDA in response to her claim. [...] Feeling gaslit, is another keyword often used by working mothers who say they have suffered discriminarion in the workplace. ‘Women often say they feel like they are going mad,’ explains Brearley, referring to the many stories she’s heard from mums battling for a fair working environment.