Claim: Arabs “Don’t Win” the Nobel Prize, Fields Prize or Wolf Prize

Verdict: False and misleading

“There's 500 million Arabs in the world, and yet they don't produce science. They don't win the Nobel Prize, they don't win the Fields Prize, they don't win the Wolf prize. They don't produce literature”

– RFK Jr.

Robert F Kennedy Jr. says Arabs don’t produce science or literature

RFK Jr. took to the stage at a republican campaign event this week and used his time in the spotlight to claim that Arabs – that is, the huge number of people falling into this ethnic and linguistic group – make no substantial contribution to science.

Most of the response to these comments has focused on the inherent prejudice many people see in his comments. But putting that aside for a moment: is it even true?  

The Most Recent Counter-Example

To evaluate his claim, all that’s needed is a brief look at past Nobel Prize winners. While AP’s “Fact Check” [2] covered many examples, a lot of these are Peace Prize winners, which doesn’t really address the meat of Kennedy’s claim. He is talking about science. So how far do we have to go back to find a solid counter-example?

Only to the 2025 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. Palestinian-Jordanian chemist Omar Yaghi won the prize along with two other researchers for his work on metal-organic frameworks. These are molecular structures, designed so there are multiple cavities inside a crystalline framework, which can be used to store specific substances. Moreover, Yaghi won the Wolf Prize in 2018 for the same work.

Older Examples

And Yaghi isn’t the only one. Ardem Patapoutian, a Lebanese-Armenian raised in Beirut, won the Medicine Prize in 2021 for discovering the receptors for temperature and touch. And Ahmed Zewail, an Egyptian-American (raised in Egypt) won the 1999 Chemistry Prize for his work with femtosecond spectroscopy.

The Grain of Truth – and the Nature of the Falsehood

There is a grain of truth in RFK Jr.’s statement, but a small one: nobody seems to have won the Fields Medal with citizenship in an Arab-majority country.

But searching for counter-examples almost misses the point. Think about this: did RFK Jr. look at the facts before making this statement? Clearly not. And he went even further with his claims. Why suggest Arabs don’t “produce science” or “produce literature”? There are not many reasons someone would make much an absurd statement. I’ll leave it to the reader to choose the most appropriate.  

The Time a Futurama Writer Devised a Whole New Math Theorem for an Episode

In Futurama’s season 6 episode “The Prisoner of Benda,” the crew ends up using a futuristic device to switch minds with each other. Over the course of the episode, everyone’s minds get thoroughly shuffled up. This would be simple to fix, but there’s a catch: two people who’ve already switched brains can’t do so again. So you’ll probably need new, un-switched people to untangle it all, but how many?

As the gravity of the situation sinks in, the Professor – in Bender’s body, naturally – utters one of my favourite lines of the series: “I’m afraid we need to use... math!”

Futurama | We'll Need to Use....Math!

But the episode was written by mathematics PhD-holder Ken Keeler, who actually devised a proof that forms the solution in the episode. While Keeler has been keen to downplay it, it has since become known as Keeler’s Theorem or the Futurama Theorem, and has been published in an academic journal.

Keeler’s Solution

Ken Keeler’s solution uses group theory to solve the problem. In particular, it uses the S_n symmetric group, with n being the number of people involved. The group basically collects the number of permutations that can be done on n elements. For his solution, he needed n + 2 elements – with two new people – so the group becomes S_n+2.

You can read the paper for the full mathematical details – “k-cycles” and all – but the basic idea is simple. You split the original bodies into two groups, all elements up to some person i, and then all the rest from i + 1 to n. Then, you go through the first part, switching each person with the first new element, x – since x is new, these switches have never happened before. For the remaining people (i + 1 onwards) you switch them each with y. Finally, you switch x with i + 1 and y with 1.

This makes everything almost right, with the exception that you may need to switch x with y right at the end. However, this works because they’ve never switched in this process.

The paper referenced above finds some cases you can solve with fewer additional people, and other authors have since worked to generalise the solution for bigger and more complicated mixtures. Not only did Keeler solve a legitimate mathematical problem, it even inspired mathematicians to take it further.  

Claim: Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Originally Came from a Lab Leak

Verdict: False and very misleading

“Clearly, [the] COVID-19 pandemic and many other global pandemics that we have, have come from gain of function research. The RSV epidemic that we have – that's the biggest killer of kids in this country today – came from these kinds of [gain of function] experiments.”

– RFK Jr

RFK Jr: Lyme Disease, RSV, Covid-19 "Almost Certainly" Created By Gain-of-Function Research - And U.S.…

RFK Jr. has had some strange ideas about RSV since at least 2021, and in August he mentioned it on both CNN and Fox News. In both cases, he pointed the finger at “gain-of-function” research for creating the virus, suggesting that it was created in a lab leak.

The RSV Lab Leak Hypothesis

As usual, RFK Jr.’s public comments don’t offer much detail. But as Tom Bartlett notes in an Atlantic article, RFK explains his theory in his book The Real Anthony Fauci, and cites an article written for Children’s Health Defense.

This article covers many aspects of the true history of the disease, but leaves out crucial details and – in the process – lurches towards a misleading conclusion.

The True Story of RSV

The true story of RSV is basically how the article describes it. In 1955, chimpanzees at the Walter Reed Army Institute for Medical Research came down with a mysterious respiratory illness, which the researchers called chimpanzee coryza agent (CCA). They also infected other chimps to prove it was transmissible. However, one worker who spent a lot of time with the chimpanzees also got sick, and it also infected his barrack-mates.  

More research came quickly, as an identical virus was isolated from children with respiratory illnesses, and the virus itself was characterised and tested in tissue cultures. Scientists eventually combined CCA with the identical viruses found in humans, under the name RSV.

This is all basically in line with the blog post RFK Jr. cites. However, RFK Jr. and the post he’s citing mistake this as the origin of the virus itself, when in fact it was simply when we first discovered it.

The Evidence They Ignore

Firstly, the initial wave of research found that 80% of healthy children in the state already had an antibody to it by age 4. However, later studies make it unavoidably clear. Working with historical samples, researchers confirmed a case of what we now call RSV dating back to 1931. This is 25 years before the supposed “lab leak.”

Research Reveals a Surprising Anti-Alzheimer’s Effect of Eggs

A recent study looked at links between different environmental exposures and Alzheimer’s risk, based on a sample of around 500,000 people in the UK. Oddly, consuming eggs had one of the strongest protective effects out of everything covered in the study. But is this just an odd result, or does something as simple as eating eggs really have a protective effect?

Eggs Consistently Reduce Alzheimer’s Risk in Studies

Based on available research, it really does seem like egg consumption is associated with a reduced risk of Alzheimer's and cognitive decline. Firstly, the UK-based study had a huge sample size, so it’s pretty compelling on its own, suggesting a 76% increase in risk for people who never ate eggs.

But that is far from the only result:

• A 2024 study followed 1,024 older adults over 6.7 years on average, and analysed their risk based on their egg consumption at baseline. The results showed that consuming more than one egg per week was associated with a reduced risk of Alzheimer’s, 47% lower than people who ate less than one egg per week.

• A 2026 study used a large cohort of Seventh-day Adventists in the US, looking at a sample of 39,498 people (who were aged 65 or older during follow-up) over an average of 15.3 years. Risks decreased with greater egg consumption. For instance, there was a 17% reduction in risk for people who ate eggs once a month to once a week, and a 27% reduction for people who ate eggs five or more times a week, compared to people who never or rarely consumed eggs.

• A meta-analysis looking at 13 longitudinal and 8 cross-sectional studies on egg consumption found that consuming 1 egg per day was associated with a 9% decrease in the risk of cognitive decline. More precisely, the benefits peaked at 50 to 60 g of egg per day.

Why Are Eggs Good for Your Brain?

As well as containing omega-3 fatty acids, lutein, tryptophan, vitamin B12 and other potentially beneficial ingredients, many authors point to choline as a key factor. This essential nutrient is a precursor to acetylcholine, which is crucial for memory and synaptic function. Choline levels in the body have been independently linked to changes in cognitive function with aging and Alzheimer’s disease – so there are also other options if you don’t like eggs!

Claim: AI is “Much Better Informed Than Any Doctor in the Country”

Verdict: False and misleading

“You may have a medical record that is a thousand pages long. You have six minutes with a doctor today. He is not gonna be able to review it, but the AI can and it can distill it. It can give you a second opinion that is much better informed than any doctor in the country.”

– RFK Jr.

VP Vance speaks at MAHA Summit with HHS Sec. Kennedy

Speaking at the MAHA Summit in Washington, last week RFK Jr. claimed that AI is “much better informed than any doctor in the country.” While RFK Jr. did mention some undeniable advantages – quickly reading long medical histories, for instance – how does the overall claim stack up?

What Do Doctors Think?

Major medical organisations, including the American Medical Association, pushed back RFK Jr.’s statement, stressing the value of physicians’ years of training and experience. The statement emphasises the benefit of using the technology responsibly, as a tool to help doctors, guided by the “humanity of clinical practice.”

What Does the Evidence Say?

There are some studies showing a benefit of AI systems over human doctors, including one oft-cited meta-analysis result on empathy. This study typifies an issue with much of the research in the area. Of 15 studies included in the study, 13 showed higher empathy ratings for AI, compared to human doctors. However, the interactions studied were only through text. This severely limits applicability to real-world situations, where most medical evaluations are face-to-face.

Another meta-analysis compared diagnostic capabilities of AI with human doctors, based on 83 studies. The results showed that AI performed roughly as well as physicians overall, or non-expert physicians. However, it was worse than expert physicians.

A controlled study touched on the “second opinion” aspect of RFK Jr.’s claim, looking at whether LLMs can help members of the public choose accurate diagnoses and treatments. Generally, this study found that the LLM did better alone than it did assisting a human. When assisting non-experts – who may not communicate clearly – it does no better than participants findings their own online sources. 

The Final Verdict

LLMs may play many valid roles in healthcare both now and in the future, but they certainly are not better informed than any doctor in the US. Nor is it a particularly useful option for non-experts seeking medical advice.

Claim: DARPA is Spraying Chemtrails Out of Planes via Jet Fuel

Verdict: False and highly misleading

“That is not happening in my agency. We don’t do that. It’s done, we think, by DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency]. And a lot of it now is coming out of the jet fuel. You know, those materials are put in jet fuel. I’m going to do everything in my power to stop it.”

– RFK Jr.

Inside RFK Jr.’s Health Agenda 100 Days In | Dr. Phil Primetime

Last week, after his discussion of electromagnetic fields, RFK Jr. made an off-hand reference to “chemtrails.” Although he didn’t say much about it in that speech, he’s been more open about it in the past. So is RFK Jr. right about chemtrails?

Chemtrails vs. Contrails

As a 26-year old Environmental Protection Agency fact sheet explains, the commonly-seen trails emitted from aircraft are contrails. These are simply line-shaped “clouds” formed by condensed water that has frozen into tiny particles of ice.

Air can only hold so much water, and this amount increases as the air temperature increases. So there is condensation – and contrails – if there is too much moisture, or if the temperature decreases.

Hot water vapour is a by-product of the combustion of jet fuel. However, as it is released into the surrounding air, it cools and often condenses into liquid droplets. This is the true cause of most things called “chemtrails.”

What Do Experts Think About Chemtrails?

An interesting paper presented supposed “evidence” of chemtrails to 77 experts in either contrails or atmospheric deposition. Most of this was either in the form of photos of contrails or chemical analyses of water, snow or soil samples.

All but one expert said they had not encountered evidence of a large-scale atmospheric program. For all the photographs, no expert said that such a program was the simplest explanation, and offered explanations generally relating to humidity. For the chemical analyses, over 82% said chemtrail-like programs weren’t the simplest explanation. Here, there was more uncertainty, with up to 14% saying they weren’t sure of the cause, and one even backing a secret atmospheric program as an explanation.

The Final Verdict

RFK Jr.’s claims were made without evidence. There appears to be no DARPA program doing such activity, several agencies regulate aircraft emissions, and jet fuel does not release the chemicals proponents claim it does [3]. This could be all done in secret – theoretically – but there is no evidence of it. 

Claim: The “Living Carnivore” Diet is Good for Weight Loss

Verdict: Broadly true, but misleading

“Within 30 days I lost 20 pounds. JD Vance is also on the diet and you can see how different he looks.”

“The way that you're supposed to eat it is bite for bite. You take a bite of the meat, you take a bite of the sauerkraut”

RFK Jr.

After Vice President JD Vance credited his weight loss to RFK Jr’s recommended “meat and sauerkraut” diet, the “Living Carnivore” diet has been under the spotlight. But does it really work?

The Good News: Weight Loss is Reasonable

For the goal of weight loss – without considering other issues – and despite no direct evidence on the Living Carnivore diet specifically, it doesn't seem too bad. This largely comes down to the benefits of eating fermented foods. Generally speaking, there are multiple benefits to consuming fermented foods, as shown by a study using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 to 2018.

The study found that each 100 g of microbe-containing foods was associated with reduced BMI, waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, C-reactive protein, plasma glucose and triglyceride, and increased high density lipoprotein cholesterols. The mechanisms of action get a little complicated, but generally include influencing gene expression, slowing gastric emptying and modulation of the gut microbiome.

The carnivore side of the diet is where the problems come in. Purely for weight loss, there is some evidence that they can lead to weight loss and increased satiety.

The Bad News: Nutrient Deficiencies and Cholesterol

A 2026 scoping review focused on the carnivore diet noted these benefits for weight loss, but stressed the “substantial risks” of nutrient deficiencies. Overall, the carnivore diet can lead to deficiencies in thiamine, vitamin C, vitamin D, magnesium, iodine, potassium, calcium and fibre. The deficiency in fibre is also pretty extreme, at less than 1/25th of the adequate intake. It's debatable whether you could rectify these issues by adding fermented foods.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol generally increase, carrying risks of heart disease, and some versions have high sodium, potentially leading to high blood pressure and more.

And it should go without saying that eating “bite for bite” is probably useless, it takes a long time to digest food, relative to actual eating process. It all hits your stomach basically simultaneously anyway.

Overall, the diet – especially fermented foods – could help weight loss, but it’s terrible as an overall diet.

Claim: Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Pose a Risk to Human Health

Verdict: False and misleading

“We are also examining electromagnetic fields [...] I've litigated on this issue, there's a lot of science out there, there's over 10,000 studies that we submitted to the court of appeals in a case that we won, that ordered FCC to redo its regulations, but there are still gaps in knowledge and we're filling those. [...] these questions deserve rigorous science, transparency and answers.”

– RFK Jr.

RFK Jr. Says HHS Is Examining The Impacts Of Chemtrails And Electromagnetic Fields

Before making a widely-reported comment on “chemtrails,” RFK Jr. spoke on the supposed risks of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) this week. He references a lawsuit he submitted with Children’s Health Defense, which focused on the risks of wireless technology generally and 5G in particular.

But are RF electromagnetic fields really a risk to human health?

RF-EMF and Cancer

Much of the concern around RF-EMF is about possible links to cancers.

The first of two systematic reviews from the same team covers the “most researched” cancer outcomes for RF field exposure. Based on 63 studies conducted between 1994 and 2022, the review finds no risk for these cancers. These include glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, salivary gland tumours or paediatric brain tumours. Factors like the amount of time participants had been using mobile phones or cumulative call time made no apparent difference.

RF-EMF and Cognition

A systematic review and meta-analysis on RF-EMF exposure and cognition indicators – such as memory, executive function and complex attention – only found five eligible studies. Therefore, the evidence was low to very low certainty. Regardless, the studies found little to no link.

RF-EMF and Self-Reported Symptoms

Many people report symptoms such as headaches and sleep issues, which they link to RF-EMF exposure. A systematic review on this topic included 41 studies, and all either found no effect or small, non-significant effects. Notably, it also found that people were no better than chance at determining whether they were exposed to RF-EMF.

RF-EMF and Oxidative Stress

Many claims in the lawsuit referenced by RFK Jr. relate to oxidative stress and RF-EMF. A systematic review on this topic included 45 in vivo and 11 in vitro studies, and generally found inconsistent results and studies with a high risk of bias. Rodent studies suggest a possible increase in oxidative stress in the testes, serum and thymus, but more evidence is needed.

Overall, none of these claims are backed by strong evidence.

The “Physical Activity Paradox” in Dementia Risk Revealed in New Study

A new study has revealed a so-called “physical activity paradox” in dementia risk. In a nutshell, even though physical activity is generally considered to be protective, in some cases it can actually increase your risk. Just looking at “physical activity” as a single factor misses a lot of crucial detail.

The Different Types of Physical Activity  

The researchers identify four different types of physical activity: leisure-time, occupational, household and commuting activity. They’re basically pointing out that having a physically-demanding occupation is different from doing chores around the house or cycling to the office.

However, much of the evidence focuses on leisure time physical activity, which only represents 12% of all physical activity around the world.

The Study: Reviewing the Evidence on Different Types of Physical Activity

The researchers basically wanted to update a previous review they published in 2022, adding evidence from the intervening years and performing the analysis for different types of activity separately. The new paper [1] uses the 57 studies included in that review, and adds 17 new cohort and case-control studies published between the start of 2021 and May 2026. This led to a combined sample of over 4.2 million participants.

Studies were excluded if they had a follow-up of less than a year, if diagnoses were based on self-report or cause of death data, if people had dementia or mild cognitive impairment at baseline, or any research focusing specifically on people with a diagnosed disease.

What They Found: Leisure Time Activity Protects, Occupational Activity Doesn’t

The analysis found that leisure time physical activity was associated with a 24% lower chance of all-cause dementia, while occupational activity increased risk by around 20%. These were the two areas with the most research, but less reliable findings also suggest that household activity reduces risk by 15% and commuting activity increases it by 10%.

Limitations to Keep in Mind

As always, there are issues to keep in mind. Firstly, physical activity was based on self-reporting, which is open to bias, and secondly, the type of studies included make it hard to rule out reverse causation. Notably, 93% of studies came from high income countries, so the evidence base is not very representative of the world. The results broadly held for specific types of dementia, but vascular dementia wasn’t as well covered. 

However, the core findings generally seem robust.

Claim: Two Recent “Measles-Associated” Deaths May Have Been “Fabricated”

Verdict: Broadly false, but some questions remain open

“The announcement appears to have been premature, and the deaths may even have been altogether fabricated by one of the Governor's hopeful staffers. The Lancaster County Coroner says that it has no record of any measles deaths. State law requires that all measles deaths be reported to the coroner.” – RFK Jr

Governor Shapiro's unseemly rush to Lancaster County to convene a national press conference and his…

Two deaths that the Pennsylvania Department of Health called “measles-associated” have been at the centre of a political firestorm this week. RFK Jr. said these deaths may have been “fabricated,” but more broadly, disputes that measles was the cause of death.

The Two Deaths: What We Know

A great FactCheck.org post runs through the details of the deaths. In short, while few details have been released, we do know that two individuals died, that they had not been vaccinated and that they had confirmed measles infections. While we know next-to-nothing about one case, the other case has since been confirmed to have been an infant whose primary cause of death was a “traumatic laceration of the spleen.”

This child contracted measles before birth and died shortly afterwards. It’s worth noting that this child would not ordinarily have been vaccinated by this point.

One thing to note: It has been clearly confirmed by the coroner and other state health officials that the deaths were not fabricated, as RFK Jr. claimed.

The “Cause of Death” in Measles Cases

RFK Jr. said the coroner had no record of any “measles deaths,” but this is misleading on its own. In fact, most deaths from measles do not list measles as a primary cause of death. Instead, the primary cause of death is usually the specific complication leading to death. One study from the 1970s looked at this and found that only 9.9% of 454 cases actually listed “measles” as the primary cause of death.

Measles and the Spleen

Since details are only available in one case, the focus has been on that child. The coroner claimed that measles didn’t contribute to the death, because the spleen was not enlarged [3]. However, vaccine expert Dr. Paul Offit noted that this is hard to determine after a rupture, and such a rupture should have a clear explanation. This has not been settled yet.

It’s worth noting that an enlarged spleen is a known complication of measles, present in one third of all cases in a recent Polish study and 15.4% of all infant cases.

Overall, these cases were not fabricated. That said, health officials could have avoided a lot of confusion by being clearer in the way the cases were reported.