Closest thing I could find: https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/12746
The real issue here is that you're hearing a lot of crackpot junk and it's a pain to prove something doesn't exist. This is particularly so on the internet, when any crank with wifi can churn out all the garbage they like. It's one thing to tell me to put essential oils in my hair to make it shiny. It's another thing altogether when sites like these spread misinformation that literally kills people.
And that's what they are trying to do. Kill people? Not necessarily, although these sites don't seem to care about that. It's more that they want to spread whatever the hell they want to and let it get buried. And then reasonable people such as you and I waste our valuable time trying to find anything.
It's called sealioning
, and it is a very real and nasty tactic used by trolls. They make an assertion and expect the person they make it to, to do the legwork to disprove it. This technique exists to waste people's time and patience, get them to stop thinking critically, and to just paste in whatever they find first, without looking closely.
The link I added, above, is from The Pennsylvania Immunization Coalition (PAIC) which (per their website): "is an organization of volunteers consisting of individuals and organizations that have an interest in advancing the mission of timely and effective immunizations for all Pennsylvania residents."
Is it the best source? Maybe. But to find sources to prove something doesn't exist is exceedingly difficult.
1) Please use Google.
2) Recognize that the more outlandish claims you're hearing are probably junk although not always
(after all, in the Tuskegee Experiment
, Black men weren't treated for syphilis as a part of 'science'). But, to use a metaphor, when you hear hoofbeats, you should usually be thinking they're being made by horses and not zebras.
3) Ask yourself what the agenda is of the person making the assertion.
Look at their other assertions. Do they see a conspiracy under every bush? Or is this a reasonable, otherwise not hysterical person sounding an alarm?
4) Ask for their proof.
Look at whatever site(s) they use to validate their claims. Are they reputable sites? Or do they push an agenda? If you're unsure about what a website is all about, most have an About page or a FAQ. If all else fails, look at other pages or posts to get a feel for a site. Are they reasonably following science? Are they fearmongering? Are they making stuff up, just like the Weekly World News
? Are they a satire site like the Onion
5) To add to #4, the person making the assertion has the burden of proving it's true. The burden does not shift to the skeptic to disprove it, unless and until the one making the assertion provides reasonable, vetted information to bolster their claim.
Allow me to reiterate that:
If someone tells you something outlandish, it's up to them to prove it.
It's not up to you to disprove it. And if the claimant tries to say that you're the one who's got to disprove their assertion, then the claimant simply doesn't have any proof.
6) The vaguer a claim, the more likely it is to be false.
Someone's sister's niece's dog trainer's hairdresser is not a reliable source of information. And a claim that someone somewhere got Covid by wearing their dad's slippers is highly unlikely to be true.
7) Check sample sizes.
A claim about 4 people in a world full of around 2 billion times that number of people? That's no better than throwing darts at a board. But a claim about 100,000 people, particularly out of a subset of population (say, a group with 1 million members) is something to take notice of.
8) There are a lot of people online who have nothing better to do than (and often think it's funny) to lie to people.
They make stuff up because they're bored, or they think they'll get some measure of internet fame. And maybe it runs away from them. Or maybe they want it to. Either way, these are horrible people. Spreading their nonsense makes us all dumber and more paranoid, and for no good reason. They don't deserve that kind of attention, even if we don't know them by name.