Topic guide
Heart health
Evidence checks about cardiovascular headlines, cholesterol, blood pressure, stroke, statins, heart attacks and risk-factor claims.
What to watch for
Common ways headlines can go too far
- Risk-factor changes treated as proven outcome benefit
- Relative risk reported without baseline risk
- Associations framed as direct prevention advice
Heart-health headlines often turn risk-factor changes, relative-risk figures or observational associations into stronger prevention advice than the evidence supports.
Common hype patterns
- Changes in cholesterol, blood pressure or biomarkers framed as proven clinical benefit.
- Relative risk reported without baseline or absolute-risk context.
- Observational associations presented as direct prevention advice.
- Early device, AI or drug signals described before patient outcomes are shown.
Questions to ask before trusting the headline
- Was the claim tested in people, or only in cells, animals or models?
- Is the outcome something patients notice, or only a surrogate marker?
- Does the headline distinguish association from causation?
- Are absolute risks, comparators and uncertainty shown clearly?
- Would the finding change real-world behaviour, or is it mainly hypothesis-generating?
How deHype.io reads this topic
deHype.io separates the public claim from the underlying evidence. The aim is not to dismiss early science, but to show whether the headline has kept the finding in proportion.
Helpful evidence guides
How to read a health headline
A practical guide to spotting overstatement and understanding the evidence behind health and science headlines.
How deHype grades claims
Learn how deHype evaluates health and science claims with a transparent grading system based on strength, relevance, and quality of evidence.
Association vs causation
Observational studies can highlight associations between factors, but these associations do not necessarily mean that one thing causes another. Understanding the principles behind observational studies and the risk of misinterpreting their results is essential for evaluating health and science news.
Related topics
Cancer
A guide to interpreting news and research about cancer, with evidence checks on headlines, early trials, mouse studies, cell studies, and survival claims.
Dementia
Evidence checks about dementia headlines, Alzheimer’s claims, supplements, biomarkers, and early-stage research. This topic hub explores common sources of hype and confusion in dementia reporting, especially when animal models, preliminary biomarker findings, or small observational studies are misrepresented as larger clinical breakthroughs.
Diabetes and metabolic health
Evidence checks about diabetes, glucose, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, CGMs, drugs, diet and prevention claims.
Diet and nutrition
Diet and nutrition headlines often exaggerate the strength of evidence, particularly when reporting findings from observational nutrition studies or focusing on single-food claims. This topic hub explores common pitfalls in nutrition reporting and how to interpret diet-related health headlines.
Exercise and physical activity
Evidence checks about exercise, walking, strength training, fitness trackers, sedentary behaviour, VO2 max and activity headlines.
Gut health and microbiome
Evidence checks about microbiome, probiotics, prebiotics, fermented foods, IBS, gut-brain claims and digestive-health headlines.
Seen a headline in this topic?
Paste the link and get a deHype evidence check.
Check a heart-health headline