Imagine being a doctor who spent years learning how to heal people, or a scientist who has dedicated a career to solving problems that could save millions of lives. You would hope your work would be met with trust, respect, and support. But according to a new survey from The Harris Poll, commissioned by Bayer, many of the people on the front lines of American science and medicine are worried that the very foundation of their work is cracking. The report, called “Warning Signs: Scientists and Doctors Worry About the Future of American Innovation,” asked primary care physicians, scientists, engineers, and graduate students in STEM fields about the health of American research. What it found is a community that is deeply concerned about misinformation, public cynicism, funding shortages, and political interference. The survey, released on November 10, 2026, included 202 primary care physicians, 250 scientists or engineers, and 254 graduate students in STEM. These are the people who are supposed to be leading the next wave of discoveries, and they are sending out an alarm. They see incredible possibilities ahead, but they also see powerful forces trying to push science backward. Nearly nine in ten doctors and scientists say online misinformation about science and health is a serious problem, and they believe it has gotten worse over the past five years. It is not a distant worry; it is something they encounter every day in their work, in conversations with patients, in classrooms, and in public discourse. The survey captures a moment of tension: the people closest to discovery still believe in the future of American science, but they are not sure the country believes in them.
Misinformation is, by far, one of the most urgent concerns among the scientific community. The survey found that 91 percent of scientists and 89 percent of doctors are worried about science and health misinformation spreading online, and roughly equal shares say the problem has gotten worse over the last five years. Graduate students are even more concerned, with 95 percent expressing alarm. This is not an abstract issue. Doctors see the results of false information every day, from patients who refuse proven treatments to people who make health decisions based on viral videos rather than medical evidence. Ninety percent of doctors say false or misleading information can lead people to make decisions that negatively affect their health, and that is a staggering statement when you stop to think about it. It means that the people who are trained to save lives are watching public trust in their expertise erode in real time. Alongside misinformation, there is a broader sense of public cynicism toward entire fields of science. And that cynicism is emotional. It is personal. The survey found that more than two-thirds of doctors, scientists, and graduate students say Americans’ cynicism toward their field has led them to rethink their career choices. Specifically, 69 percent of doctors, 71 percent of scientists, and 72 percent of graduate students said they have questioned whether they should keep going. These are not the feelings of a confident and stable profession. They are the feelings of people who have devoted their lives to learning, research, and care, only to feel increasingly dismissed, attacked, or ignored. The problem is so serious that more than eight in ten respondents fear the United States is at risk of losing talented scientists, researchers, and health professionals to other countries. Among graduate students, that fear jumps to 89 percent. These young people are the future of American innovation, and many of them are wondering if that future is worth staying for.
Funding shortfalls and political interference are adding more weight to these worries. Regardless of how they identify politically, 90 percent of doctors, 91 percent of scientists, and 89 percent of graduate students say they are concerned about political interference in scientific research priorities. That level of agreement is rare in a country where almost everything else seems divided. But it makes sense: scientists want to pursue research based on evidence, not ideology. When political considerations start shaping what gets studied, what gets funded, and what gets published, the whole enterprise loses credibility. It also wastes time and resources, pushing researchers away from promising areas of inquiry and toward whatever is politically convenient. Alongside political interference, chronic funding shortages continue to squeeze laboratories, universities, and research institutions. Many scientists spend more time applying for grants than actually conducting research. Some promising projects never leave the starting line. Some graduate students decide that the uncertainty is not worth the struggle. Yet the survey also found something hopeful buried in all of this anxiety: the scientific community still believes in the power of research. Nine in ten doctors, scientists, and graduate students agree that with enough funding and investment in research and development, humanity is only a few years away from solving some of its most urgent health challenges. That is a powerful statement. It means the talent is there, the ideas are there, and the moment is not lost. What is missing is the willingness to create the conditions that allow science to flourish. The survey respondents are not saying that breakthroughs are impossible. They are saying that breakthroughs could happen much sooner than we think, if only we choose to support them.
Despite everything, the report contains an important note of optimism. Doctors, scientists, and graduate students are significantly more confident in America’s scientific leadership than the general public is. While only 69 percent of all U.S. adults believe the country will remain a world leader in scientific research over the next ten years, 94 percent of doctors, 89 percent of scientists, and 90 percent of graduate students say the same thing. That gap is remarkable. It suggests that the people who are actually doing the work have a much clearer view of what American science is capable of than the public does. They have seen breakthroughs happen. They have worked with brilliant colleagues from around the world. They know that American universities, hospitals, and research centers remain magnets for talent and innovation. They are not naive, though. Their confidence is conditional. They know that maintaining leadership in science depends on rebuilding public trust, protecting research from political interference, and providing stable, long-term funding. John Gerzema, CEO of The Harris Poll, captured this perfectly when he said, “The scientists and doctors working on tomorrow’s breakthroughs are sending a clear signal today: innovation cannot thrive without public trust. Their message is not one of pessimism, but of urgency. If we want the next generation of discoveries that improve lives, we must support the people, institutions, and scientific process that make those discoveries possible.” That is the heart of this entire report. It is not a warning coming from despair. It is a warning coming from love of science and concern for the future. The people who are most likely to create the cures, technologies, and insights of tomorrow are telling us that they are still here, but they need help staying.
The cost of ignoring these warning signs is enormous, and it is measured in more than just budgets or research papers. It is measured in lives that could have been saved, diseases that could have been cured, and breakthroughs that never happen. When misinformation convinces someone to skip a vaccine, or avoid a needed treatment, or ignore medical advice, the consequences can be deadly. When political interference distorts research priorities, it delays progress on the problems that matter most to ordinary people. When funding shortages force promising young scientists out of the field, the loss is not felt immediately, but it compounds over decades. The people who leave science at thirty may have been the ones to discover a new therapy at fifty. The doctors who decide to stop doing research may never again ask the questions that could have changed the way we treat a disease. The graduate students who choose to go overseas may never come back. This is not speculation; it is a real trend that the survey respondents recognize. More than eight in ten say they fear the United States is losing talented people to other countries, and among graduate students, the concern is even stronger. The survey uses the phrase “the cost of inaction” to describe what is at stake, and that phrase is accurate. Inaction is not a neutral choice. Every year that we allow misinformation to spread unchecked, every year that science is underfunded, every year that political pressure distorts research, we move a little further away from the future that these doctors and scientists still believe is possible. We lose not just time, but people. And once people leave science, it is very hard to bring them back.
This survey is more than a collection of statistics. It is a human story, told by doctors who are tired of watching patients make dangerous choices based on false information, by scientists who are tired of having their work questioned by people with no expertise, and by graduate students who are trying to decide whether their dreams are worth the struggle. The research was conducted online by The Harris Poll on behalf of Bayer between September 23 and October 14, 2026, and the full report is available on The Harris Poll’s website for anyone who wants to examine the methodology or read more details. But the numbers are only part of the message. The deeper message is that American innovation is not guaranteed. It is something that has to be protected, funded, and trusted. The doctors, scientists, and graduate students who responded to this survey still believe in the promise of science. They still believe that the United States can lead the world. They still believe that with enough investment and support, humanity can solve some of its most pressing health challenges in just a few years. But they are also telling us that this future is fragile. The warning signs are visible right now, and they are not subtle. The question is whether we will listen. The future of American science, and with it the health and prosperity of millions of people, may depend on how we answer that question. We can take these warnings seriously and act on them, or we can let them fade into background noise. The people who are working on tomorrow’s breakthroughs are still here, still hopeful, and still ready. They just need to know that the rest of us are ready too.