#FactCheck - Viral Video of ‘Hatha Yogi’ Meditating on Snowy Mountain Is AI-Generated

Introduction 

In a major policy shift aimed at synchronizing India's fight against cyber-enabled financial crimes, the government has taken a landmark step by bringing the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the ambit of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). In the notification released in the official gazette on 25th April, 2025, the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, included the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under Section 66 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “PMLA”). The step comes as a significant attempt to resolve the asynchronous approach of different agencies (Enforcement Directorate (ED), State Police, CBI, CERT-In, RBI) set up under the government responsible for preventing and often possessing key information regarding cyber crimes and financial crimes. As it is correctly put, "When criminals sprint and the administration strolls, the finish line is lost.” 

The gazetted notification dated 25th April, 2025, read as follows:

“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 66 of the Prevention of Money-laundering Act, 2002 (15 of 2003), the Central Government, on being satisfied that it is necessary in the public interest to do so, hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India, in the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, section 3, sub-section (i) vide number G.S.R. 381(E), dated the 27th June, 2006, namely:- In the said notification, after serial number (26) and the entry relating thereto, the following serial number and entry shall be inserted, namely:— “(27) Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C).”.

Outrunning Crime: Strengthening Enforcement through Rapid Coordination 

The usage of cyberspace to commit sophisticated financial crimes and white-collar crimes is a one criminal parallel passover that no one was looking forward to. The disenchanted reality of today’s world is that the internet is used for as much bad as it is for good. The internet has now entered the financial domain, facilitating various financial crimes. Money laundering is a financial crime that includes all processes or activities that are in connection with the concealment, possession, acquisition, or use of proceeds of crime and projecting it as untainted money. In the offence of money laundering, there is an intricate web and trail of financial transactions that are hard to track, as they are, and with the advent of the internet, the transactions are often digital, and the absence of crucial information hampers the evidentiary chain. With this new step, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) will now make headway into the investigation with the information exchange under PMLA from and to I4C, removing the obstacles that existed before this notification.

Impact

The decision of the finance ministry has to be seen in terms of all that is happening around the globe, with the rapid increase in sophisticated financial crimes. By formally empowering the I4C to share and receive information with the Enforcement Directorate under PMLA, the government acknowledges the blurred lines between conventional financial crime and cybercrime. It strengthens India’s financial surveillance, where money laundering and cyber fraud are increasingly two sides of the same coin. The assessment of the impact can be made from the following facilitations enabled by the decision: 

• Quicker internet detection of money laundering
• Money trail tracking in real time across online platforms
• Rapid freeze of cryptocurrency wallets or assets obtained fraudulently

Another important aspect of this decision is that it serves as a signal that India is finally equipping itself and treating cyber-enabled financial crimes with the gravitas that is the need of the hour. This decision creates a two-way intelligence flow between cybercrime detection units and financial enforcement agencies. 

Conclusion

To counter the fragmented approach in handling cyber-enabled white-collar crimes and money laundering, the Indian government has fortified its legal and enforcement framework by extending PMLA’s reach to the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C). All the decisions and the brainstorming that led up to this notification are crucial at this point in time for the cybercrime framework that India needs to be on par with other countries. Although India has come a long way in designing a robust cybercrime intelligence structure, as long as it excludes and works in isolation, it will be ineffective. So, the current decision in discussion should only be the beginning of a more comprehensive policy evolution. The government must further integrate and devise a separate mechanism to track “digital footprints” and incorporate a real-time red flag mechanism in digital transactions suspected to be linked to laundering or fraud. 

‍

Introduction
‍

The rapid rise of AI tools has reshaped how health content spreads on platforms like Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts. These sub-minute videos promise quick fixes for weight loss, glowing skin, or reduced anxiety, often delivered through polished visuals and confident AI-generated voiceovers. The result feels highly personalised, as if the advice is tailored to each viewer, even though it is usually generic and widely recycled.

Short-form videos tend to compress complex health topics into “one tip” solutions, such as drinking a specific detox drink daily or following a single workout for rapid fat loss. While appealing, this oversimplification removes essential context, including individual health conditions, long-term risks, and scientific nuance. For example, viral diet trends or fitness hacks may work for some but can be ineffective or even harmful for others.

Algorithms play a major role in amplifying such content. Videos that promise dramatic transformations or instant results are more likely to gain engagement, which pushes them to wider audiences. Repeated exposure then builds familiarity, making the advice seem more credible over time. Audiences often trust this content due to its clean presentation, authoritative tone, and frequent repetition. However, the risks include misinformation, unrealistic expectations, and potential harm from unverified practices. To approach such content critically, viewers should cross-check claims with credible medical sources, avoid relying on single tip solutions, and remember that real health advice is rarely one size fits all.
‍

The Illusion of Personalisation
‍

AI-generated health content often mimics personalisation through:

• Synthetic voiceovers that designers created to match different age groups through their voice output, which speak specifically to people who are 20 years old and younger.
• The script development process uses data that tracks currently popular search terms.
• Viewers can interpret information through visual elements, which show changes between two different states.

The process of "personalisation" uses generalised data that does not match individual health profiles to create targeted results. The videos fail to provide a medical assessment because they do not consider:

• Existing medical conditions
• Hereditary differences
• Personal habits and the impact of surrounding conditions

The users will think that general medical advice applies to their personal health needs, which will lead them to use this advice inappropriately.

‍

Short-Form Content and Oversimplification
‍

Short-form videos have time limitations, which result in reduced complex medical information development into basic medical stories. The typical patterns of evaluation include these two patterns of evaluation include:

• “One-tip solutions” (e.g., “Drink this before bed to burn fat”)
• Binary framing (“good vs bad foods”)
• The process of eliminating all disclaimers and side effects information

For example, the three diet methods here the three diet methods here

• Viral detox drinks that make the claim to "flush toxins" from the body
• Extreme calorie-cutting diet hacks
• Fitness shortcuts that guarantee users will see results within days

The content demonstrates a pattern of disregarding essential human body operation rules that include both metabolic patterns and human body operation over extended periods of time.
‍

Algorithmic Amplification and Virality
‍

The recommendation algorithms used by Instagram and YouTube deliver their most important results through three main factors, which include:

• Engagement (likes, shares, watch time)
• Retention rates
• Emotional or aspirational triggers 

Health-related content that claims to deliver:

• Immediate body changes
• Needs minimal work from viewers
• Results in extreme physical changes

Attractive health-related content that displays extreme physical changes through quick transformations. The system produces a continuous cycle during which:

1. Misleading content gains traction
2. Algorithms amplify it further
3. More creators replicate similar formats using AI tools 

The system produces a secondary result that favours content that people share instead of content that has authentic credibility.
‍

Why Do Users Trust AI-Generated Health Content?
‍

Several psychological and technological factors contribute to trust:

1. Professional Aesthetics - AI tools generate high-quality visual content together with authentic voiceover performance and expert-level script documentation, which replicates professional communication methods.
2. Repetition and Familiarity - When people encounter identical recommendations multiple times, their belief in those recommendations increases through the illusory truth effect.
3. Authority Signals

• Medical terminology serves as a standard term
• Medical professionals appear in stock footage through lab coat visuals
• The narrator delivers information through an assertive speaking style

4. Perceived Personal Relevance - Algorithmic targeting makes users feel the content is "meant for them.

Real-World Examples of Viral Trends
‍

The typical types of health misinformation that artificial intelligence systems spread through their enhanced capabilities include:

• Diet Trends: Keto shortcuts, extreme intermittent fasting variants
• Fitness Hacks: Spot reduction exercises (scientifically unsupported)
• Supplement Advice: Unverified claims about vitamins or herbal products
• Mental Health Tips: Oversimplified coping strategies that lack clinical evidence

The statement that drinking warm lemon water will detox your liver continues to be popular despite the fact that the liver has natural self-detoxification abilities.

‍

Risks and Public Health Implications
‍

The widespread consumption of such content creates multiple dangers, which include:

1. Physical Health Risks

• Nutritional deficiencies from extreme diets
• Injury from improper exercise techniques
• Delayed medical consultation

2. Psychological Impact

• Unrealistic body image expectations
• Anxiety due to conflicting advice

3. Misinformation Ecosystem

• The public loses confidence in evidence-based medicine
• Unverified or pseudoscientific practices spread throughout society

Regulatory and Ethical Concerns

The increase of AI-generated health materials connects to more extensive problems, which include:

• Who is responsible for the content
• Who is responsible for the platform
• How AI systems show their inner workings to users

Most platforms today do not have strict systems that can:

• Verify medical claims
• Display which health advice comes from artificial intelligence
• Punish users who spread false information multiple times

The absence of regulations allows misleading information to spread without consequences.
‍

A CyberPeace Perspective: Building Digital Health Resilience
‍

The problem needs complete involvement from several parties to create effective solutions that protect both online security and data integrity. 
‍

For Users

• Users should confirm claims by using trustworthy medical resources, which include the WHO and peer-reviewed studies.
• People should avoid using "quick solutions" until they receive guidance from certified experts.
• Users should exercise caution when they encounter content that does not include necessary warning signs.

For Platforms

• Platforms should implement systems that enable users to identify AI-generated content.
• Platforms should decrease the visibility of health information that contains false statements.
• Platforms should support authentic health content producers who have been validated.

For Policymakers

• Policymakers should create standards that govern AI-produced medical content.
• Policymakers need to enhance initiatives that teach people about the health information available online.

For Content Creators

• Content creators must show how they implement AI technologies.
• They should stay away from making claims that either go beyond what is needed or state things as absolute truth.

Conclusion
‍

AI-generated health tips on short-form video platforms create complex research conditions that involve three scientific fields: technology, psychology and public health. The tools provide equal access to information, yet create higher risks for people to believe false information when they use the tools without responsible usage. 

The challenge requires organisations to maintain user safety through accurate information management while providing users with transparent digital health services. The growing dependence of users on algorithm-based content requires educational institutions to develop students' critical thinking abilities and digital skills to minimise negative effects from AI-driven communication methods.
‍

References
‍

• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12924558/
• https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/40/2/daaf023/8100645
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12673052/
• https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/public-health/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1713794/full
• https://www.who.int/teams/digital-health-and-innovation/digital-channels/combatting-misinformation-online
• https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12982-025-00777-2
• https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2026/04/21/chatbot-medical-advice-accurate/

‍

Introduction

Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C) was established by the Ministry of Home Affairs  (MHA) to provide a framework and eco-system for law enforcement agencies (LEAs) to deal with cybercrime in a coordinated and comprehensive manner. The Indian Ministry of Home Affairs approved a scheme for the establishment of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) in October2018, which was inaugurated by Home Minister Amit Shah in January 2020. I4C is envisaged to act as the nodal point to curb Cybercrime in the country. Recently, on 13th March2024, the Centre designated the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) as an agency of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to perform the functions under the Information Technology Act, 2000, to inform about unlawful cyber activities.

The gazetted notification dated 13th March 2024 read as follows:

“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 79 of the Information Technology Act 2000, Central Government being the appropriate government hereby designate the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C), to be the agency of the Ministry of Home Affairs to perform the functions under clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section79 of Information Technology Act, 2000 and to notify the instances of information, data or communication link residing in or connected to a computer resource controlled by the intermediary being used to commit the unlawful act.”

Impact

Now, the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) is empowered to issue direct takedown orders under 79(b)(3) of the IT Act, 2000. Any information, data or communication link residing in or connected to a computer resource controlled by any intermediary being used to commit unlawful acts can be notified by the I4C to the intermediary. If an intermediary fails to expeditiously remove or disable access to a material after being notified, it will no longer be eligible for protection under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000.

Safe Harbour Provision

Section79 of the IT Act also serves as a safe harbour provision for the Intermediaries. The safe harbour provision under Section 79 of the IT Act states that "an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him". However, it is notable that this legal immunity cannot be granted if the intermediary "fails to expeditiously" take down a post or remove a particular content after the government or its agencies flag that the information is being used to commit something unlawful. Furthermore, Intermediaries are also obliged to perform due diligence on their platforms and comply with the rules & regulations and maintain and promote a safe digital environment on the respective platforms.

Under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, The government has also mandated that a ‘significant social media intermediary’ must appoint a Chief Compliance Officer (CCO), Resident Grievance Officer (RGO), and Nodal Contact Person and publish periodic compliance report every month mentioning the details of complaints received and action taken thereon.

I4C's Role in Safeguarding Cyberspace

The Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) is actively working towards initiatives to combat the emerging threats in cyberspace. I4C is one of the crucial extensions of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, working extensively to combat cyber crimes and ensure the overall safety of netizens. The ‘National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal’ equipped with a 24x7 helpline number 1930,  is one of the key component of the I4C.

Components Of The I4C

1. National Cyber Crime Threat Analytics Unit
2. National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal
3. National Cyber Crime Training Centre
4. Cyber Crime Ecosystem Management Unit
5. National Cyber Crime Research and Innovation Centre
6. National Cyber Crime Forensic Laboratory Ecosystem
7. Platform for Joint Cyber Crime Investigation Team.

‍

Conclusion

I4C, through its initiatives and collaborative efforts, plays a pivotal role in safeguarding cyberspace and ensuring the safety of netizens. I4C reinforces India's commitment to combatting cybercrime and promoting a secure digital environment. The recent development by designating the I4C as an agency to notify the instances of unlawful activities in cyberspace serves as a significant step to counter cybercrime and promote an ethical and safe digital environment for netizens.

References

• https://www.deccanherald.com/india/centre-designates-i4c-as-agency-of-mha-to-notify-unlawful-activities-in-cyber-world-2936976
• https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/home-ministry-authorises-i4c-to-issue-takedown-notices-under-it-act-124031500844_1.html
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/it-ministry-empowers-i4c-to-notify-instances-of-cybercrime-101710443217873.html
• https://i4c.mha.gov.in/about.aspx#:~:text=Objectives%20of%20I4C,identifying%20Cybercrime%20trends%20and%20patterns

‍