Know who is selling you bad science.

Health misinformation kills people. That is not hyperbole. Anti-vaccine rhetoric, cancer cure scams, and supplement grifters have measurable body counts. The people spreading this misinformation often have credentials (or claim to), platforms with millions of followers, and financial incentives to keep going. The people debunking them are scattered across journals, YouTube channels, and Twitter threads with no centralized resource.

Quack or Snack exists to change that. The project has three goals: raise awareness of who the pseudoscientists actually are and what they are claiming, drive real discussion about how we as a society police disinformation (what works, what does not, and where the lines should be), and have a little fun doing it. The duck puns and the voting system are not decoration. They are the mechanism that gets people to actually engage with the evidence.

The "Quacks" side profiles over 100 documented figures with danger ratings (low through critical), credential analysis (legitimate, fake, or misleading), claim-by-claim debunking (false, misleading, or unproven verdicts), and links to published takedowns from journalists and scientists. The "Snacks" side profiles 68+ science communicators, educators, and journalists who fight misinformation, with the same structured format: who they are, what they do, and why their work matters.

The annual Quacky and Snacky Awards add a community layer. Swipe-based voting (10 votes per day, fingerprint and IP rate-limited) produces real-time leaderboards. Top 16 per category advance to finals in December. The gamification is deliberate: making people engage with the profiles, read the evidence, and form opinions is the point. The voting is the mechanism, but the awareness and the discussion are the product.