For years, we told ourselves a comforting story about health misinformation: it was a problem for other people. You know, the fringe elements, the deeply political, those glued to their screens. We imagined a neat little box where these “misinformed” individuals resided, easily distinguished from the “rest of us.” But a groundbreaking global survey, the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer Special Report on Trust and Health, has shattered that illusion. This massive undertaking, involving over 16,000 people across 16 countries, reveals a truth that’s both startling and a little unnerving: a staggering seven out of ten people worldwide believe at least one widely debunked health claim. We’re not talking about obscure conspiracy theories here, but common falsehoods like animal protein being healthier, fluoride being harmful, or the risks of childhood vaccinations outweighing the benefits. Even the notion that raw milk is superior to pasteurized milk or that Tylenol in pregnancy causes autism made the list, alongside more outlandish claims about vaccines being used for population control. Richard Edelman, the CEO behind this five-year-old survey, frankly admits his shock. He, like many of us, assumed skepticism towards mainstream health science was limited to a specific segment. “It’s not true,” he declares. “It’s everybody.” This isn’t a niche problem; it’s a pervasive current running through the very fabric of our global society.
This comprehensive data systematically dismantles all our preconceived notions about who falls prey to misinformation. Forget the idea that education is a shield; a whopping 69% of university graduates believe at least one false health claim – practically identical to the 70% of those without a degree. Political leanings offer no sanctuary either, with 78% of right-leaning individuals and a significant 64% of left-leaning individuals endorsing falsehoods. Age, too, seems to offer little protection. What’s even more surprising is the geographical breakdown: developing countries, not just the usual suspects, show a more pronounced trend of misbelief. And the United States, often unfairly characterized as the global epicenter of health misinformation, doesn’t even crack the top half of the surveyed nations. This realization forces us to confront a more complex reality. As the report wisely states, “Rather than pushing for uniformity of belief, it’s more effective to invest in health outcomes and impact.” It’s a stark reminder that our understanding of trust and belief is far more nuanced and widespread than we ever imagined. The problem isn’t confined to a “them”; it’s a “us” issue, cutting across every demographic boundary we previously used to categorize and dismiss it.
Edelman researchers, who’ve been meticulously tracking this data since the health-specific report launched in 2021, pinpoint a gradual, almost insidious, erosion of trust as the underlying culprit. Dave Bersoff, EVP and head of research at the Edelman Trust Institute, paints a vivid picture of this creeping decay: “You have fears—the fears are chronically under- or unaddressed. That starts leading to some of the erosion of the social fabric.” This lack of genuine listening and validation of people’s anxieties creates a fertile ground for polarization, which in turn breeds paralysis and grievance. Ultimately, this leads to a hardening of tribalism, a rigid us-versus-them mentality where trusting anyone outside one’s immediate group feels almost impossible. Bersoff elaborates on this “hardening,” explaining, “this idea that I can’t trust anybody who isn’t like me, and so anybody who isn’t like me when it comes to beliefs or values or cultural background is immediately distrusted by me because I think they’re out to get what I deserve, or anything they get comes at my expense.” It’s a deeply negative and antagonistic way of engaging with the world, a pervasive suspicion that is eroding the very foundations of shared understanding and cooperation. This isn’t just about healthcare; it’s about the fundamental erosion of our collective ability to find common ground and work together.
Adding to this already complex picture is a parallel and equally alarming crisis: a dramatic plummet in confidence in people’s own ability to make informed health decisions. In just one year, public confidence in finding reliable health answers and navigating their own health choices has dropped a full ten percentage points, now resting at a precarious 51%. This isn’t just a localized issue; it’s reflected in statistically significant declines across 14 of the 16 surveyed countries. Coinciding with this, trust in the media to accurately cover health topics remains significantly below its pre-COVID levels, languishing at only 46% globally. Richard Edelman aptly observed, “People are overwhelmed with info, and I’m not sure they can differentiate between this source and that source.” The problem, as he and his colleagues emphasize, isn’t a lack of information, but rather a suffocating abundance of it. Jennifer Hauser, global health cochair at Edelman, eloquently articulates this paradox: “I’m getting so much information I don’t know who to trust, how to wade through this, and make my final call.” We are drowning in data, yet starved for clarity, leaving us feeling vulnerable and adrift in a sea of conflicting advice.
Into this deeply felt void, artificial intelligence is rapidly and confidently stepping in. A significant 35% of global respondents are already turning to AI for various aspects of their health management. What’s more, a striking 64% believe that someone proficient in AI can perform at least one medical task as skillfully, or even better, than a trained doctor. This includes crucial functions like determining appropriate treatment or medication (21%) and diagnosing illnesses (17%). This embrace of AI isn’t happening in isolation; it’s a rational, albeit perhaps desperate, response to a healthcare system that millions feel has failed them. In the U.S. alone, public trust in the healthcare system has plummeted from 71.5% in 2020 to a concerning 40.1% in 2024, according to Johns Hopkins University. This erosion is compounded by the sheer difficulty of accessing care in the first place, with 35% of Americans reporting an inability to obtain quality, affordable healthcare – a burden that disproportionately affects Black, Hispanic, and lower-income adults. Adding to this financial stress, a KFF Health Tracking Poll in January 2026 revealed that healthcare is the top household expense concern for Americans, eclipsing even rent, food, or utilities. The 2025 Edelman report further underscores this, showing that in over half of the surveyed countries, a majority believe institutions are actively hindering access to quality care. This perception, regardless of its absolute accuracy, is fundamentally reshaping where people seek answers. Hauser keenly observes that people feel judged by their doctors and are seeking solace in algorithms: “AI can be less judgmental than physicians… AI can be more empathetic than perhaps what they’re finding with their physician.” Among those already using AI for health, 84% seek immediate answers, and 74% use it for a second opinion – revealing a deep yearning for accessible, non-judgmental information and validation.
Despite the pervasive challenges, the survey offers a glimmer of hope, primarily because personal physicians remain the most trusted voice in health across all 16 markets. Justin Blake, executive director of the Edelman Trust Institute, emphasizes that the report’s most crucial contribution might be correcting our fundamental misunderstanding of who is actually fueling this surge of misinformation. “In some ways, we’ve misunderstood who the audience agreeing with these divisive beliefs are,” he explains. Now that the data has unequivocally shown that 70% of us are holding these beliefs, Blake argues, “They are us.” This groundbreaking realization creates an opening for a less confrontational and polarized approach. Knowing that “the entire information ecosystem has changed” and “how people like to be related to has evolved” allows us to confront the reality of the situation and, hopefully, make genuine progress. Richard Edelman echoes this cautious optimism but stresses the need to abandon old habits. “Science for years has just been about the what,” he says. “I think in the next phase, they’re going to have to, as scientists, talk about the why and the how—because it’s not enough anymore to just say, ‘Here’s the solve, just go.’” The Edelman team’s prescription is clear: less top-down broadcasting, more genuine conversation; less authoritative pronouncements, more collaborative partnership. “We have to listen. We’ve got to meet people where they are,” Richard Edelman insists. Jennifer Hauser
succinctly summarizes this shift: “People don’t want their doctor to be their guru. They want their doctor to be their guide.” This profound shift in perspective, from authority to partnership, from telling to guiding, holds the key to rebuilding trust and navigating the complex landscape of health in our increasingly digital and polarized world. It is a call for empathy, understanding, and a willingness to truly listen to the fears and anxieties that drive so many to seek answers in unconventional places.