jpd459/healthver_resplit huggingface dataset:
Question: Can taking medication to lower fever, such as paracetamol (tylenol) and ibuprofen (advil) worsen COVID-19?
Claim: Ibuprofen is sold under many brand names, including Advil and Motrin. While it can treat headaches and fever like acetaminophen, it is also beneficial for muscle pulls because it reduces inflammation.
Evidence: There are clearly COVID-19 cases where NSAIDs should not be used, but there is no strong evidence that NSAIDs must be avoided in all patients with COVID-19;
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: For NSAIDs, there is no clear scientific evidence linking ibuprofen and other NSAIDs to worsening of COVID-19; however, it seems prudent to continue them, if necessary to control pericarditis, and on the other hand, to prefer paracetamol for fever and systemic symptoms related to COVID-19.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Ibuprofen is an over-the-counter medication that is used widely for the treatment of pain and fever during COVID-19 pandemic.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: At this time, there is no supporting evidence to discourage the use of ibuprofen.
Verdict: Supports
Question: Are there any antiviral drugs to treat the coronavirus disease? 
Claim: No drug is approved for covid-19
Evidence: This article summarizes agents with potential efficacy against SARS-CoV-2.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: remdesivir, which has been previously administered to Ebola virus patients, has also proven effective in the U.S. against coronavirus
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Several drugs such as chloroquine, arbidol, remdesivir, and favipiravir are currently undergoing clinical studies to test their efficacy and safety in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China; some promising results have been achieved thus far.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: In particular, several cases of recovered patients have been reported after being treated with lopinavir/ritonavir (which is widely used to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection) in combination with the anti-flu drug oseltamivir.
Verdict: Refutes
Question: Does Vitamin C impact COVID-19 prevention and treatment?
Claim: There is no proof vitamin c can treat or cure coronavirus.
Evidence: Following a balanced diet and supplementation with proper nutrients may play a vital role in prevention, treatment, and management of COVID-19.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: CONCLUSION The use of IV vitamin C in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease may be feasible.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Dietary supplementation has not been linked to COVID-19 prevention.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Dietary supplementation has not been linked to COVID-19 prevention. However, supplementation with vitamins C and D, as well as with zinc and selenium, was highlighted as potentially beneficial for individuals with, or at risk of, respiratory viral infections or for those in whom nutrient deficiency is detected.
Verdict: Supports
Question: what kinds of complications related to COVID-19 are associated with hypertension?
Claim: people with uncontrolled or untreated high blood pressure may be at risk of getting severely ill with COVID-19.
Evidence: Pre-existing comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease are associated with a greater severity and higher fatality rate of covid-19.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Hypertension appeared consistently as the most prevalent risk factors in COVID-19 patients.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence:  Hypertension has been proven to be more prevalent in patients with an adverse outcome (admission in intensive care unit, use of mechanical ventilation, or death).
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: obesity represents the strongest predictor for Covid-19 followed by diabetes and hypertension in both sexes
Verdict: Supports
Question: has social distancing had an impact on slowing the spread of COVID-19?
Claim: Social distancing is a voluntary practice to help stop the spread of COVID-19
Evidence: the centralized social distancing is necessary to minimize the pandemic spreading.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: stronger social distancing, e.g., cutting 75% of social ties, can reduce the outbreak by 75% for the C isolation, by 33% for the D isolation, and by 87% for the (C+D) isolation strategy.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: The government of different countries has adopted various policies to contain this epidemic and the most common were social distancing and lockdown. Our analysis revealed that the measures can slow down the outbreak. We can reduce the epidemic size and prolong the time to arrive at the epidemic peak by seriously following the measures suggested by the authorities.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Discussion: The combined social distancing measures implemented by the Greek authorities within the first few weeks after the first confirmed case of the virus reduced the COVID-19 growth rate.
Verdict: Supports
Question: does hydroxychloroquine treat COVID-19?
Claim: hydroxychloroquine helped coronavirus patients survive better
Evidence: Preliminary clinical evidence from China and France showed significant virological and clinical benefit in HCQ-treated patients, while other studies, mostly including critically ill patients, did not show favorable results.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: There is theoretical, experimental, preclinical and clinical evidence of the effectiveness of chloroquine in patients affected with COVID-19. 
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: We found that fatalities are 18.8% (9/48) in HCQ group, which is significantly lower than 47.4% (238/502) in the NHCQ group (P<0.001). The time of hospital stay before patient death is 15 (10-21) days and 8 (4-14) days for the HCQ and NHCQ groups, respectively (P<0.05). The levels of inflammatory cytokine IL-6 were significantly reduced from 22.2 (8.3-118.9) pg mL-1 at the beginning of the treatment to 5.2 (3.0-23.4) pg mL-1 (P<0.05) at the end of the treatment in the HCQ group but there is no change in the NHCQ group.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Among patients with COVID-19, the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia.
Verdict: Supports
Question: Can taking medication to lower fever, such as paracetamol (tylenol) and ibuprofen (advil) worsen COVID-19?
Claim: Anti-inflammatory drugs, which includes steroids such as prednisone and non-steroidal drugs like ibuprofen, work by decreasing inflammation
Evidence: For NSAIDs, there is no clear scientific evidence linking ibuprofen and other NSAIDs to worsening of COVID-19;
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: At this time, there is no supporting evidence to discourage the use of ibuprofen.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: For NSAIDs, there is no clear scientific evidence linking ibuprofen and other NSAIDs to worsening of COVID-19; however, it seems prudent to continue them, if necessary to control pericarditis, and on the other hand, to prefer paracetamol for fever and systemic symptoms related to COVID-19.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: There are clearly COVID-19 cases where NSAIDs should not be used, but there is no strong evidence that NSAIDs must be avoided in all patients with COVID-19;
Verdict: Supports
Question: are there any clinical trials available for the coronavirus
Claim: While remdesivir is an antiviral agent that is being explored as a treatment for COVID-19 and is available under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), there are currently no drugs or other therapeutics approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to prevent or treat COVID-19. Studies are in progress to learn more.
Evidence: No randomised controlled evidence is currently available for remdesivir and favipiravir.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: On April 28, 2020, a total of 945 studies on COVID-19 have been registered in ClinicalTrials.gov; 586 studies are interventional (62.0%), the most frequent allocation scheme is the parallel group assignment (437; 74.6%), they are open-label and the most common primary purpose is the research on treatment.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: In total, 309 trials evaluating therapeutic management options, 23 studies assessing preventive strategies and 3 studies examining both were retrieved.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Currently available published, peer-reviewed results mostly involve small sample sizes with study limitations restricting the interpretation of the findings.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: has social distancing had an impact on slowing the spread of COVID-19?
Claim: Social Distancing Prevent the Spread of Coronavirus
Evidence: The government of different countries has adopted various policies to contain this epidemic and the most common were social distancing and lockdown. Our analysis revealed that the measures can slow down the outbreak. We can reduce the epidemic size and prolong the time to arrive at the epidemic peak by seriously following the measures suggested by the authorities.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: social distancing and have seen slowing the spread of COVID-19.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Our models predict these strict social distancing measures caused a 79% and 61% reduction in the daily cases of COVID-19 across Australia and New Zealand respectively. This provides both evidence and impetus for governments considering similar measures in response to COVID-19 and other pandemics.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: The decentralized strategy is insufficient when used alone, but offers the best results when combined with the centralized one. Indeed, the (C+D) is the most efficient isolation strategy at mitigating the network superspreaders and reducing the highest node degrees to less than 10% of their initial values.
Verdict: Refutes
Question: Is a headache sign of the coronavirus disease?
Claim: A headache isn't a common symptom of the covid-19
Evidence: However, other manifestations such as headache, abdominal pain, diarrhea, loss of taste and smell were added to the clinical spectrum, during the course of the COVID19 pandemic.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Muscle injury or myalgia was the most common (19.2%, 95%CI 15.423.2%) neurologic symptom of COVID-19, followed by headache (10.9%, 95%CI 8.6213.51%);
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Clinical symptoms included fever (100%), cough (69.6%), expectoration (43.5%), myalgia (26.1%), headache (17.4%) and dyspnea (17.4%), and the less common symptom was diarrhea (4.3%).
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: The aim of this manuscript is to investigate transversally Ear Nose Throat (ENT) symptoms COVID-19 infection correlated and to study the neurotropism and neuroinvasiveness of the virus in the head-neck district through the investigation of the sense of smell, taste, tearing, salivation and hearing.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: Can animals spread COVID-19?
Claim: A few dogs and cats living with COVID-19 patients have tested positive for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Evidence: Experimental data showed ferrets and cats are highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 as infected by virus inoculation and can transmit the virus directly or indirectly by droplets or airborne route.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: There is currently no indication that feline- or canine-to-human transmission can occur, though there is rising evidence of the reverse.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Cellular angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) is the receptor of SARS-CoV-2 which is identical or similar in different species of animals such as pigs, ferrets, cats, orangutans, monkeys, and humans. Moreover, a recent study predicted that dog might be secondary host during the evolution of SARS-CoV-2 from bat to human. Therefore, there is a possibility of spreading SARS-CoV-2 through domestic pets.
Verdict: Supports
Question: how does the coronavirus respond to changes in the weather
Claim: In the first in a series of conversations on the science of COVID-19, we learn how the hot weather is affecting the movement of the novel coronavirus.
Evidence: Preliminary observations from our team and others suggest that temperature and climatological factors could influence the spread of this novel coronavirus
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Being a novel pandemic coronavirus version, it might be ongoing during summer conditions associated with higher air temperatures, low relative humidity and precipitation levels.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Temperature is the most influential parameter that reduces the growth at the rate of 13-16 cases/day with a 1{degrees}C rise in temperature
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Each 1 C rise of temperature was associated with a 4.8951% (t = 2.29, p = 0.0226) decrease in the number of daily cumulative confirmed cases of COVID-19
Verdict: Neutral
Question: how does the coronavirus respond to changes in the weather
Claim: Coronavirus may be more severe in colder months than warmer ones
Evidence: temperature is the most influential parameter that reduces the growth at the rate of 13-17 cases/day with a 1C rise in temperature.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Each 1 C rise of temperature was associated with a 4.8951% (t = 2.29, p = 0.0226) decrease in the number of daily cumulative confirmed cases of COVID-19
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Results indicated that temperatures had a negative linear relationship with the number of confirmed cases.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: These results provide evidence for the relationship between several weather variables and the spread of COVID-19. However, the (conservatively) estimated relationships are not strong enough to seasonally control the epidemic in most locations.
Verdict: Refutes
Question: Does Vitamin C impact COVID-19 prevention and treatment?
Claim: The virus cannot survive in tropical temperatures:
Evidence: Dietary supplementation has not been linked to COVID-19 prevention.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Although COVID-19 can be rapidly diagnosed, efficient clinical treatment of COVID-19 remains unavailable, resulting in high fatality.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: The majority of documents encouraged the consumption of fruits, vegetables, and whole grain foods. Thirty-one percent of the guidelines highlighted the importance of minerals and vitamins such as zinc and vitamins C, A, and D to maintain a well-functioning immune system.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: CONCLUSION The use of IV vitamin C in patients with moderate to severe COVID-19 disease may be feasible.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted mental health?
Claim: WH conducted a detailed survey into how coronavirus has impacted people mentally.
Evidence: Psychological impact was assessed using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status with the Goldberg's General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). 
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has produced substantial health challenges from the perspective of both its direct health complications and the disruption to delivery of standard care for individuals with a range of acute and chronic health issues.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: The socio-health emergency caused by COVID-19 may have a significant psychological impact on the population.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Various psychological problems and important consequences in terms of mental health including stress, anxiety, depression, frustration, uncertainty during COVID-19 outbreak emerged progressively.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: how does the coronavirus respond to changes in the weather
Claim: cold weather and snow prevent the coronavirus disease
Evidence: COVID-19, due to its regular flu-like symptoms, is also expected to show similar seasonality and subside as the global temperatures rise in the northern hemisphere with the onset of spring
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Temperature is the most influential parameter that reduces the growth at the rate of 13-16 cases/day with a 1{degrees}C rise in temperature
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Correcting for that distributed delay and offering conservative estimates, we find a negative relationship between temperatures above 25 degrees Celsius and estimated reproduction number ([R]), with each degree Celsius associated with a 3.1% (95% CI, 1.5% to 4.8%) reduction in [R]. Higher levels of relative humidity strengthen the negative effect of temperature above 25 degrees.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: meteorological conditions and air pollution, as concurring factors, impact COVID-19 transmission, using data on new confirmed cases from 219 prefecture cities from January 24 to February 29, 2020. Results revealed a kind of nonlinear dose-response relationship between temperature and coronavirus transmission
Verdict: Neutral
Question: Does heat prevent COVID-19?
Claim: Taking a hot bath does not prevent the new coronavirus disease
Evidence: Of note, 44.12% of the detected IgM levels were dropped below the cutoff value after heating, suggesting heat inactivation can lead to false-negative results of these samples.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Since many coronaviruses are sensitive to heat, heating inactivation of samples at 56C prior to testing is considered a possible method to reduce the risk of transmission, but the effect of heating on the measurement of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies is still unclear.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: It is suggested that Chinese medicine of clearing heat and removing toxin should be used to prevent the uninfected people from COVID-19, and intervene in the early stage of the disease and control the development of it to be severe by inhibiting the cytokine storm.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Our results indicate that heat inactivation of serum at 56C for 30 minutes interferes with the immunoanalysis of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Heat inactivation prior to immunoanalysis is not recommended, and the possibility of false-negative results should be considered if the sample was pre-inactivated by heating.
Verdict: Supports
Question: how do people die from the coronavirus?
Claim: male patients with other COVID-19 mortality risk factors, such as older age and additional comorbidities, had an increased risk of death.
Evidence: The cause of most deaths has been acute pneumonia.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Respiratory failure has been cited as the major cause of death
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Compared to the recovered group, more patients in the death group exhibited characteristics of advanced age, pre-existing comorbidities, dyspnea, oxygen saturation decrease, increased WBC count, decreased lymphocytes, and elevated CRP levels.
Verdict: Supports
Question: what are the mortality rates overall and in specific populations
Claim: While some children and infants have been sick with COVID-19, adults make up most of the known cases to date.
Evidence: We estimate an overall infection fatality rate of 1.29% (95% credible interval [CrI] 0.89 - 2.01), as well as large differences by age, with a low infection fatality rate of 0.05% for under 60 year old (CrI 0-.19) and a substantially higher 4.25% (CrI 3.01-6.39) for people above 60 years of age.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Mortality was significantly associated with older age, lower body mass index, chronic renal disease, higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, lower PaO2/FIO2 ratio, higher D-dimer, higher C-reactive protein, and receipt of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, renal replacement therapy, or vasodilator therapy.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence:  The COVID-19 population-level mortality rate (per 100,000 person-years) increased with age: from 0.1 deaths among 30-39 year olds to 9.5 deaths among 80 year olds.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: A confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection substantially increased the probability of death across all patient groups, ranging from nine (6 to 15) times the population mortality in 35-year old infected females to a 53-fold increase (46 to 59) for 95 year old infected males. The highest relative risks were observed among males and older patients.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: Can favipiravir help treat COVID-19?
Claim: Favipiravir may treat SARS-CoV-2
Evidence: Herein, we examine the effects of Favipiravir (FPV) versus Lopinavir (LPV)/ritonavir (RTV) for the treatment of COVID-19.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: currently, appropriate treatment for patients with COVID19 is an ACE2 inhibitor and a clinical problem reducing agent such as favipiravir in addition to hydroxychloroquine and corticosteroids.
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Twenty-nine studies were identified as potential sources of evidence of the clinical safety of favipiravir. 
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Our study reports the promising effectiveness of favipiravir for treating COVID-19 patients.
Verdict: Supports
Question: Does Vitamin D impact COVID-19 prevention and treatment?
Claim: The rationale for using vitamin D is based largely on immunomodulatory effects that could potentially protect against COVID-19 infection or decrease the severity of illness
Evidence: The severity of coronavirus 2019 infection (COVID-19) is determined by the presence of pneumonia, severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (SARS-CoV-2), myocarditis, microvascular thrombosis and/or cytokine storms, all of which involve underlying inflammation.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: a small reverse correlation between mortality rate and vitamin D status was observed throughout the globe (r= -0.177). In Asia, a medium direct correlation was observed for recovery rate (r= 0.317) and a significant reveres correlation for mortality rate (r= -0.700) with vitamin D status in such patients.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: In Europe, there were no correlations for both recovery (r= 0.040) and mortality rate (r= -0.035).
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Vitamin D dose was not significantly associated with testing positive for COVID-19.
Verdict: Refutes
Question: what is the origin of COVID-19
Claim: Although to date it is considered that Covid19 originates from bats (96.2% overall genome sequence identity) (1), the type of intermediate animals that caused the transmission to humans remains unknown (2-4)
Evidence: Although to date it is considered that Covid19 originates from bats (96.2% overall genome sequence identity) (1), the type of intermediate animals that caused the transmission to humans remains unknown (2-4).
Verdict: Supports
Evidence: Covid19 infection began in Wuhan (Hubei, China) in December, 2019.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: However, the source(s) and transmission routine(s) of SARSCoV2 remain elusive' (1).
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: This paper investigates the COVID-19 virus origin by using artificial intelligence (AI) and raw genomic sequences of the virus.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: does hydroxychloroquine treat COVID-19?
Claim: the covid-19 is a us biological weapon to reduce the planet's population
Evidence: the use of hydroxychloroquine alone was associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: Among patients with COVID-19, the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: The available evidence suggests that CQ or HCQ does not improve clinical outcomes in COVID-19.
Verdict: Neutral
Evidence: The odds of mortality were significantly higher in patients treated with Hydroxychloroquine + Azithromycin than supportive care alone [2.34 (95% CI: 1.63, 3.34); I2 = 0%]. A pooled analysis of recently published studies suggests no additional benefit for reducing mortality in COVID-19 patients when Hydroxychloroquine is given as add-on to the standard care.
Verdict: Neutral
Question: does hydroxychloroquine treat COVID-19?
Claim: Hydroxychloroquine, by itself or with azithromycin, did not improve the clinical status of patients with mild to moderate COVID-19
Evidence: patients treated with HCQ at the time of early hospital recovered faster than those who treated later or taken as second line choose for their obvious shorter hospitalization time.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Despite its small sample size our survey shows that hydroxychloroquine treatment is significantly associated with viral load reduction/disappearance in COVID-19 patients and its effect is reinforced by azithromycin.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: Among patients with COVID-19, the use of HCQ could significantly shorten TTCR and promote the absorption of pneumonia.
Verdict: Refutes
Evidence: mortality rate was increased when the treatment was conducted with hydroxychloroquine.
Verdict: Supports