copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2021-08-28): Like many DIY pregnancy tests, there’s no evidence that salt reacts with hCG at all (and no scientific reason why it should). [...] Essentially, salt pregnancy test enthusiasts disagree about what exactly should happen to the salty pee mixture to give a positive or negative result. [...] In reality, because you’re mixing urine with salt, depending on the acidity, you may get a reaction regardless of whether you’re pregnant or not.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2024-02-25): The urine test for pregnancy is a simple and non-invasive way to determine if a woman is pregnant. It works by analyzing the levels of the hormone human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in a woman’s urine. This hormone is produced by the placenta shortly after implantation and its presence in the urine is a reliable indicator of pregnancy. [...] In the 20th century, scientific advancements allowed for the development of more accurate pregnancy tests. Early versions of urine pregnancy tests involved mixing urine with various chemicals to trigger a reaction that would indicate pregnancy. These tests were often performed in laboratories and required professional interpretation. [...] Over the years, home pregnancy test kits have become simpler and more user-friendly. Today, most kits use urine samples and a chemical reaction to detect the presence of the pregnancy hormone, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). These tests typically involve collecting a urine sample in a cup and then using a test strip or stick to apply the urine and check for the presence of hCG.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-12-30): Salt pregnancy tests have been a common method used by women for decades to determine if they are pregnant. Although not scientifically proven or endorsed by medical professionals, many women claim that the accuracy of these tests is surprisingly high. The basic idea behind a salt pregnancy test is that when a woman is pregnant, her urine contains a hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which reacts with salt to produce a noticeable change in the test results. While it may not be as reliable as a traditional pregnancy test, the salt pregnancy test has gained a reputation for its accuracy and affordability, making it a popular choice for women who are eager to find out if they are expecting. [...] The salt pregnancy test involves mixing urine with salt and observing the reaction. Proponents of this method argue that if the mixture forms a creamy, white layer on top, it indicates pregnancy, while if no reaction occurs, it suggests a negative result. However, it is important to note that this test is not scientifically proven or endorsed by medical professionals. [...] The salt pregnancy test is a DIY method that involves mixing urine with salt in a container and observing the reaction. This test claims to determine pregnancy based on changes in the mixture, such as clumping or fizzing. However, there is no scientific evidence to support the reliability or accuracy of the salt pregnancy test. In fact, studies have shown that this method is not effective in detecting pregnancy.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-12-20): The salt pregnancy test is a simple, at-home test that involves mixing your urine with salt. The idea behind this test is that if you are pregnant, the salt will cause a reaction that indicates a positive result. However, there is no scientific evidence to support the accuracy of this test. In fact, it is not only unreliable but also highly subjective. The reaction can be easily misinterpreted and lead to false positive or false negative results. [...] The internet is full of home remedies and DIY pregnancy tests, and one that has gained popularity in recent years is the salt pregnancy test. This test involves mixing urine with salt and observing the reaction. It is claimed that if the salt reacts differently than expected, it could indicate pregnancy. However, despite its popularity, there is no scientific evidence to support the effectiveness of the salt pregnancy test. [...] The salt pregnancy test is based on the idea that when a pregnant woman's urine is mixed with salt, it will cause a reaction such as clumping or foaming. However, there is no scientific evidence or basis for this test. It is simply a myth and should not be relied upon to determine pregnancy. It is always best to use a reputable and medically-approved pregnancy test for accurate results.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2020-09-04): People who use the salt home pregnancy test usually apply a few drops of urine to a tablespoon or two of salt, then wait a few minutes to see whether the salt or urine changes. [...] No scientific data suggest that anything in a person’s urine reacts with salt to indicate pregnancy. [...] Proponents of the salt pregnancy test say that hCG interacts with the salt, but there is no scientific evidence to support this claim.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2024-05-18): The test used in the urine test strips is based on the reaction of sodium nitroprusside (nitroferricyanide). In this reaction the acetoacetic acid in an alkali medium reacts with the sodium nitroprusside producing a magenta coloured complex:[6][14] [...] The urine test strip reaction is based on the action of leukocyte esterase in catalysing the hydrolysis of an ester of indolecarboxylic acid. The indoxyl that is liberated combines with a diazonium salt in order to produce a violet coloured azole dye.[21]
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2022-11-29): Urine sodium levels may be tested if you have abnormal blood sodium levels to help determine whether an imbalance is due to, for example, consuming too much or losing too much of the mineral. Also, if you have abnormal kidney test results, urine sodium testing may help your health practitioner determine the cause of kidney disease and help guide treatment.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-04-23): Homemade pregnancy tests like the bleach pregnancy test claim to be able to detect the pregnancy hormone by mixing urine with a household chemical like bleach. [...] Advocates of the bleach pregnancy test claim that if the bleach and urine mix is foamy, a woman is pregnant. If it's not foamy, the woman is not pregnant. However, this isn't a proven fact. [...] Most pregnancy tests will have you place the end of the dipstick in your urine stream. A few minutes later, the dipstick will show the results as a plus or minus sign, one or two lines, or the words "pregnant" or "not pregnant".
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2022-05-19): The salt pregnancy test is a DIY pregnancy test that requires two ingredients: salt and your urine, which you then mix together in a clear, clean bowl. Proponents of the test claim that if you’re pregnant, the salt will react with a hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which enters your bloodstream and urine after an embryo implants in your uterus. This is the same hormone detected in store-bought home pregnancy tests. [...] There’s no scientific explanation for how salt pregnancy tests work. Fans of the test say that hCG will react with salt, causing the mixture to curdle or change texture. But there’s zero evidence backing up that theory, and no scientific reason why salt and hCG would cause this reaction.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2024-05-23): Home pregnancy test kits detect pregnancy by picking up on the presence of a hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in urine. Pregnancy can also be detected at the clinic using a blood test for hCG. The claim that pregnancy can be confirmed by the way salt reacts to urine appears to borrow elements from how home pregnancy test kits work. However, there’s no known mechanism by which salt reacts to the presence of hCG, and thus it isn’t a reliable method for confirming pregnancy. Factually inaccurate: There’s no scientific basis for the claim that the way urine reacts to salt can indicate pregnancy. As such, people shouldn’t rely on this "test" for accurate results. [...] However, this hasn’t stopped some people from promoting dubious tests on social media, such as by claiming that the way urine reacts to salt can confirm pregnancy. This particular claim has circulated on various platforms like Facebook and TikTok for at least the last few years (see examples here and here). More recent iterations of this claim include these TikTok videos—which received hundreds of thousands of views—and this Facebook post.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-04-17): It is common knowledge that salt contains a myriad of benefits that cannot be underestimated. Call it a mineral intake for the body, cooking spices, to lighten the color of clothes, this magic powder can also be done. So, did you know that salt can also be used to test for pregnancy? The method is also easy, just sprinkle enough salt on the bowl or container that you use to collect urine. If you are positively pregnant, the HCG hormone contained in the urine will react when it is mixed with salt, which turns into a white, milky solution. [...] The fumes produced by the reaction of urine and bleaching powder are toxic, so avoid inhaling them. Try to use a mask when doing a pregnancy test using this method.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-10-26): Although some people claim to have had success with DIY pregnancy tests – which can be made with household products such as salt, sugar, and baking soda – experts stress that homemade tests aren't reliable and shouldn't be used in place of legitimate, over-the-counter options. Here's what you need to know. [...] Over-the-counter pregnancy tests work by testing your urine for elevated levels of the hormone human chorionic gonadotropin, or hCG. This hormone is produced during pregnancy and can be detected in a pregnant woman's blood and urine about 10 to 12 days after conception. The DIY tests also involve testing urine, but proponents suggest mixing together ingredients such as baking soda or vinegar to perform the test rather than peeing on a test strip. [...] - Salt: As with the baking soda test, the salt pregnancy test involves mixing equal parts urine and salt. This time, the salt is supposed to clump if you're pregnant. Again, there's no evidence to support this.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2020-10-14): There is no scientific explanation of how home salt pregnancy tests work. Many users on the internet say that the pregnancy hormone hCG in the female’s urine reacts with salt, causing the mixture to change the texture or curdle. But there is no evidence backing up this theory, and no specific reason why salt and hCG would cause such a reaction. [...] The salt pregnancy test is not believed to be fully accurate. It is more like other DIY pregnancy tests, which are not reliable either. There is no reliable evidence, either from studies or by major medical organizations that suggest that the salt pregnancy test can accurately tell you if a female is pregnant or not. Moreover, there is no evidence that salt itself can possibly detect or react with the pregnancy hormone hCG in the female’s urine. [...] - What a positive salt pregnancy test looks like- As per various sources, a positive salt pregnancy test is supposed to be milky or cheesy in texture and appearance. The claim is that the salt reacts with the hCG hormone present in the urine and blood during pregnancy.
Claim: The way urine reacts to salt is a test for pregnancy (Social media users, 2024-05-23)
Evidence (2023-07-05): A pregnancy test with salt requires basic ingredients, including morning urine and salt. All you need to do is mix your morning urine and salt in a clean bowl and then wait for a few minutes. If a mixture changes its appearance and turns milky or contains foam, the pregnancy test result with salt is positive. If there is no change in the colour, it suggests no possibility of pregnancy. [...] Also, there is no convincing evidence backing the theory related to the hCG and salt reaction. Interestingly, before the advent of modern pregnancy tests available over the counter, not all women would use home-based salt pregnancy tests much to get an idea about pregnancy, let alone talk about the reliability of this test. Therefore, the accuracy related to pregnancy tests with salt is probable. [...] In salt pregnancy test positive results, urine turns "cheesy" or "milky" after getting mixed with salt, indicating the possibility of pregnancy. It is the hormone named "human chorionic gonadotropin" present in urine post the implantation of the embryo in the uterus that reacts with salt. This is indeed the main reason for the change of colour, indicating the possibility of pregnancy.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2017-09-19): Climate models have, in fact, successfully projected the rate of global warming, comparing well with observed global temperature in recent years. The idea that models should be faulted for not predicting the "hiatus"—the period in the early 2000s during which temperatures stayed below the long-term trend—reflects a misunderstanding of what a model projection is.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2019-12-04): In an upcoming paper in Geophysical Research Letters, Zeke Hausfather, Henri Drake, Tristan Abbott and I took a look at how well climate models have actually been able to accurately project warming in the years after they were published. This is an extension of the comparisons we have been making on RealClimate for many years, but with a broader scope and a deeper analysis. We gathered all the climate models published between 1970 and the mid-2000s that gave projections of both future warming and future concentrations of CO2 and other climate forcings – from Manabe (1970) and Mitchell (1970) through to CMIP3 in IPCC 2007. [...] There are a few other results that stand out, notably the (infamous?) low sensitivity result in Rasool and Schneider (1971), which was mainly due to a lack of stratospheric adjustment and water vapor short wave absorption in their formulation. This was noted by Schneider (1975) and the calculation redone by Schneider and Thompson (1981) which turned out to be far more accurate. On the other hand, only Mitchell (1970) appears to have substantially overestimated the TCR – even while he predicted the temperature rise quite accurately (due to a compensation between a too large sensitivity and an underestimate of the forcings). [Amusing aside, both Manabe’s and Mitchell’s 1970 projections appeared in a special volume on the Global Effects of Environmental Pollution, reporting on an 1968 AAAS workshop and edited by (the now-notorious) S. Fred Singer before he went off the deep end].
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2020-02-03): Early climate models successfully predicted global warming Climate models published between 1970 and 2007 provided accurate forecasts of subsequently observed global surface warming. This finding shows the value of using global observations to vet climate models as the planet warms. [...] Climate models are equations that describe climatically relevant processes and are solved on supercomputers. In addition to being invaluable tools for testing scientific hypotheses, these models have long provided societally important forecasts. The first climate models to numerically describe an evolving and interacting atmosphere, ocean and land surface on a grid covering the entire Earth date back to the 1970s (for example, refs 1–3). Since then, the planet’s surface has warmed, in large part because of increased emissions of greenhouse gases. Writing in Geophysical Research Letters, Hausfather et al.4 retrospectively assessed the forecasting skill of climate models published between 1970 and 2007. Their results show that the physics in these early models was accurate in predicting subsequently observed global surface warming.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2024-06-03): Climate models have correctly predicted how the planet would warm due to human greenhouse gas emissions.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2019-02-11): Zeke Hausfather 09.21.17Zeke Hausfather 21.09.2017 | 12:27amA new study published in the Nature Geosciences journal this week by largely UK-based climate scientists has led to claims in the media that climate models are "wrong" and have significantly overestimated the observed warming of the planet. [...] Much of the media coverage surrounding the paper, Millar et al, has focused on the idea that climate models are overestimating observed temperatures by around 0.3C, or nearly 33% of the observed warming since the late 1800s. For example, the Daily Mail reported: [...] In the figure above, positive values mean that models are overestimating warming. Negative values mean that models are underestimating warming. The wide range of values suggests that concluding that there is a problem with the models based in this single paper’s analysis may be premature, especially since blended model air/ocean temperatures may provide a more accurate comparison.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2024-09-10): However, more recent analyses, dating back decades, have found that many of even the earliest models were remarkably accurate in their predictions of global temperature increases. Now, as computing power increases and more and more refinements are added to modeling inputs, modelers are more confident in defending their work. As a result, says Dana Nuccitelli, author of Climatology versus Pseudoscience: Exposing the Failed Predictions of Global Warming Skeptics, "there’s definitely been a shift away from outright climate science denial; because the predictions have turned out to be so accurate, it’s getting harder and harder to deny the science at this point." [...] A 2019 paper by Zeke Hausfather of the University of California, Berkeley, Henri Drake, and Tristan Abbott of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Gavin Schmidt of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies analyzed 17 models dating back to the 1970s and found that 14 accurately predicted the relationship between global temperatures as greenhouse gases increased. (The estimates of two were too high, and one was too low.) That’s because the fundamental physics have always been sound, says Dana Nuccitelli, research coordinator at Citizens’ Climate Lobby and author of Climatology versus Pseudoscience: Exposing the Failed Predictions of Global Warming Skeptics.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2019-03-01): Global impact models represent process-level understanding of how natural and human systems may be affected by climate change. Their projections are used in integrated assessments of climate change. Here we test, for the first time, systematically across many important systems, how well such impact models capture the impacts of extreme climate conditions. Using the 2003 European heat wave and drought as a historical analogue for comparable events in the future, we find that a majority of models underestimate the extremeness of impacts in important sectors such as agriculture, terrestrial ecosystems, and heat-related human mortality, while impacts on water resources and hydropower are overestimated in some river basins; and the spread across models is often large. This has important implications for economic assessments of climate change impacts that rely on these models. It also means that societal risks from future extreme events may be greater than previously thought.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2020-01-09): The results: 10 of the model projections closely matched observations. Moreover, after accounting for differences between modeled and actual changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide and other factors that drive climate, the number increased to 14. The authors found no evidence that the climate models evaluated either systematically overestimated or underestimated warming over the period of their projections. "The results of this study of past climate models bolster scientists’ confidence that both they as well as today’s more advanced climate models are skillfully projecting global warming," said study co-author Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies in New York. "This research could help resolve public confusion around the performance of past climate modeling efforts." [...] Schmidt says climate models have come a long way from the simple energy balance and general circulation models of the 1960s and early ‘70s to today’s increasingly high-resolution and comprehensive general circulation models. "The fact that many of the older climate models we reviewed accurately projected subsequent global temperatures is particularly impressive given the limited observational evidence of warming that scientists had in the 1970s, when Earth had been cooling for a few decades," he said.
Claim: climate models have overestimated the amount of global warming and failed to predict what climatologists call the warming ‘hiatus’ (James Barrett, 2017-09-19)
Evidence (2021-08-08): A recent article in the eminent US magazine Science questioned how the IPCC will deal with some climate models which "run hot". Some models, it said, have projected global warming rates "that most scientists, including the model makers themselves, believe are implausibly fast". [...] Climate models comprise millions of lines of computer code representing the physics and chemistry of the processes that make up our climate system. The models run on powerful supercomputers and have simulated and predicted global warming with remarkable accuracy. [...] For a few years now, scientists have known some new-generation climate models probably overestimate global warming, and others underestimate it.