Containing health myths in the age of viral
misinformation
Roger Collier BEng
Cite as: CMAJ 2018 May 14;190:E578. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.180543
It has never been easier in human history to find and share information about health and medicine. But much of the information
found on the Internet and shared on social media is inaccurate
and potentially dangerous. As more people seek health content
online, it will become increasingly important for medical researchers
and practitioners to find effective ways of steering the public toward
evidence-based content and away from myths and pseudoscience.
Viral misinformation has become a threat to public health.
Unfounded fears about vaccines have resulted in the re-emergence
of preventable diseases. Purveyors of naturopathy and homeopathy have huge audiences on social media, and often discourage
their followers from seeking medical care for serious illnesses. Fad
diets with unhealthy adverse effects, unproven wellness products
hawked by celebrities, appeals to opinion and emotion over facts
and reason — all of these proliferate online like bacteria on agar.
What can science and medicine do to contain the threat of health
misinformation? Throwing more facts at the problem, unfortunately,
is not the answer. People who study the growing disregard for evidence in society suggest this is more a matter of human psychology
than scientific literacy. No matter how much contrary evidence they
encounter, people tend to cling to long-held health myths. Many
social media users avoid sources of information that challenge their
views, sticking to communities in which their beliefs are confirmed.1
Nor is it constructive for medical experts to talk down to people
whose beliefs fall outside the consensus within the scientific community. Well-known physicians and scientists with large numbers
of followers on social media frequently dismiss views they deem
unworthy of respect, with disparaging remarks and putdowns. As a
result, people who already have misgivings about modern medicine become further alienated. Humility, compassion and friendly
persuasion would perhaps make for a more productive approach
to changing minds than combative superiority.
It is beyond the scope of medicine to fix the Internet, but techsavvy medical experts can assist in the fight against misinformation. They can lend their expertise to technology companies and
help develop better methods of weeding out low-quality health
content and promoting medical knowledge based on scientific
data. The medical community can also experiment with unconventional ways of disseminating accurate health information.
One new approach that has shown promise is contacting social
media influencers and asking them to share useful medical content
with their followers.2
This can be a more productive means of reach ing a skeptical audience than having medical experts use traditional
channels of communication, which usually go no further than likeminded peers. The goal of generating medical knowledge, after all,
is to improve human health, not receive kudos from colleagues.
Likewise, public health organizations need to improve their
social media presence to help Internet users find accurate health
information. A study of digital pandemics of public health misinformation found that in online discussions about a sample scientific
publication, half of social media users encountered negative and
nonempirical content unrelated to the original paper.3
The authors
refer to this problem as “social diffusion,” and concluded that public health organizations must employ new social media strategies
to improve their communication of public health information.
At the clinical level, doctors attempting to change the minds of
patients who cling to potentially harmful health myths and misconceptions will need patience. People are unlikely to abandon long-held
beliefs overnight, especially if it means abandoning online communities that have become an important part of their lives. A meta-analysis
of the factors underlying effective messages to counter attitudes
based on misinformation found that these beliefs are persistent in the
face of debunking.4 Success rates improve, however, if people are
encouraged to scrutinize their information sources, and if the debunking message includes new information that provides additional context rather than merely labelling a patient’s belief as incorrect.
The Internet and social media aren’t going anywhere, and
patients will continue to seek and share health information online.
Misinformation will persist as well. Helping patients live healthier
lives includes helping them find better health information.
References
1. Del Vicario M, Bessi A, Zollo F, et al. The spreading of misinformation online. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016;113:554-9.
2. Vogel L. Viral misinformation threatens public health. CMAJ 2017;189:E1567.
3. Seymour B, Getman R, Saraf A, et al.When advocacy obscures accuracy online: digital pandemics of public health misinformation through an antifluoride case study.
Am J Public Health 2015;105:517-23.
4. ChanMS, JonesCR, Hall JamiesonK, et al.Debunking: a meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation.Psychol Sci 2017;28:1531-46.
Your task for this assignment is to pick any one of the weekly readings from this course and to summarize the reading following the template provided below. When complete, upload this document to the dropbox in the Assignments section of Blackboard.
1. A summary includes the author and title of the material you are summarizing. Record these details below (1 mark):
Author of article: __________________________________________
Title of article: _____________________________________________
Source: ___________________________________________________
Date of publication: ______________________________________
2. What is the author’s main purpose in this article? How do you know? Hint: In addition to looking at the article itself, consider the audience, purpose, and context. (spelling/grammar, for level of detail, evidence, critical thinking )
3. Considering the author’s purpose, write down four of the most important ideas. You can use point form rather than full sentences if you want. For each main idea include one supporting detail/evidence from the article. Hint: look for examples, facts, anecdotes, descriptive details.
4. Summary: From Point-Form to Paragraph – Use the ideas you identified in the last section and turn them into a one paragraph summary of the article. Please write your one paragraph summary below. Don’t forget to use a topic sentence, at least 4-5 supporting sentences, and a concluding sentence. Include an APA reference at the end. Please write your one paragraph summary below.
