LE DEGRE D'IMPREGNATION DES DERIVES SECTAIRES AUX USA - Relations personnelles : 32 % des Américains connaissent quelqu’un qui a rejoint un groupe, y compris des connaissances (18 %), des amis (12 %) et des membres de leur famille (12 %), tandis que 3 % déclarent en avoir rejoint un personnellement.

Perceptions de la communauté : 45 % du public estiment que ces groupes sont plus courants aujourd’hui qu’autrefois.

Susceptibilité au recrutement : 32 % s’accordent à dire que la personne moyenne est susceptible de le recruter.

Attitudes envers les membres : Les opinions sont divisées, 53 % considérant les personnes rejointes comme victimes de manipulation et 28 % les tenant responsables de leurs propres choix.

Sondage YouGov réalisé en octobre 2025 :

2 232 citoyens adultes américains.

Le sondage a été réalisé entre le 2 et le 6 octobre 2025, avec une marge d’erreur de ±2,7 %.

https://lnkd.in/gsYfrD6s

Death by 1,000 cuts. And a NY Times reporter was denied access to materials that were supposed to be available for public review. This is the "transparency" tenet of "Gold Standard Science." https://lnkd.in/gaqhGPHg

📱 Les réseaux sociaux sont-ils devenus des environnements de santé publique ?

C'est la question au cœur du nouveau rapport de Benoît Heilbrunn, codirecteur de l'Observatoire Marques, imaginaires de consommation et politique de la Fondation Jean-Jaurès, et Sophie Ferreira (Le Morvan), déléguée générale de la Fondation APRIL.

L'étude montre que les effets les plus profonds des plateformes ne proviennent pas uniquement des contenus manifestement toxiques, mais aussi de publications en apparence positives, consacrées au sport, à la nutrition, au bien-être ou au développement personnel. À force de répétition, elles façonnent durablement les normes, les aspirations et le rapport à soi.

Les chiffres clés :
- 1 jeune sur 4 a déjà acheté un produit ou un contenu lié au corps ou au bien-être après exposition à un contenu sur les réseaux sociaux ;
- Seuls 28% des 15-24 ans se sentent totalement en contrôle des contenus qui leur sont proposés ;
- 82% souhaitent que les plateformes signalent davantage les contenus présentant un risque pour la santé.

Au-delà du diagnostic, le rapport plaide pour une évolution des politiques publiques : il ne s'agit plus seulement de modérer les contenus, mais d'agir sur les architectures algorithmiques et les mécanismes d'influence qui structurent les usages.

Lire l'étude : https://lnkd.in/et_tPqvt

𝟖𝟎 𝐚̀ 𝟖𝟓 % 𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜̧𝐚𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐧𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚̀ 𝐥𝐚 𝐬𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.

« Contrairement à ce que certains discours laissent entendre, cette confiance reste solide, y compris après le Covid. »
Jean-François Delfraissy

Pourtant, dans le même temps, la désinformation en santé progresse et change de nature.
« 𝑳𝒂 𝒔𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒆́ 𝒆𝒔𝒕 𝒂𝒖𝒋𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒅’𝒉𝒖𝒊 𝒍𝒆 𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒊𝒆𝒓 𝒔𝒖𝒋𝒆𝒕 𝒅𝒆 𝒅𝒆́𝒔𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏. Elle représente près de 40 % des contenus diffusés sur les réseaux sociaux. »
Mathieu Molimard
Parce qu’elle touche à l’intime, à la peur, à l’incertitude, elle devient un véritable facteur de risque, pour la santé publique, mais aussi pour notre rapport au vrai et, au-delà, pour la démocratie.

🔆 Face à ces enjeux, plusieurs leviers ont été identifiés lors de la table ronde « Enjeux contemporains de la désinformation en santé » :
→ mieux comprendre les mécanismes cognitifs qui rendent ces contenus attractifs
→ renforcer la capacité des scientifiques à communiquer
→ clarifier la distinction entre science, recherche et décision politique

🗝️ Mais surtout, un point de convergence fort s’est dégagé : l’éducation est la clé.
Éduquer dès le plus jeune âge à l’esprit critique, apprendre à distinguer science et recherche, comprendre comment se construit la connaissance : un travail de long terme, indispensable pour lutter contre la désinformation.

👉 Retrouvez notre décryptage du colloque « L’Université au cœur des transformations de la santé », organisé par France Universités et le Portiqo think tank, avec le soutien de MGEN :
https://lnkd.in/eq7MXaGJ

Lamri Adoui - Helene Boulanger - Jean-François Huchet - Ministère de l'Enseignement supérieur, de la Recherche et de l'Espace - Ministère de la Santé

Which of these claims from anti-vaccine influencers today are the most ridiculous? That vaccines are causing mass murder, destroying civilizations, or that they are a scam? https://lnkd.in/gM5Nc2jG

It's a long road to get a vaccine from the lab to people's arms--getting it out of the lab is just one of many challenges to overcome. One has to consider policies related to evaluation, production, procurement, logistics, distribution (including equity), regulation, and of course the key goal: public uptake (requiring education, promotion, acceptance, and access).

This new KFF analysis of trends in public beliefs about several vaccine mistruths is informative about this ongoing challenge. Some findings are (somewhat) heartenin; some quite concerning.

While the 1 item regarding attitudes toward mRNA vaccines in general shows improved views, I am concerned regarding how the COVID deaths q responses reflect underlying, latent public attitudes and beliefs that will impact acceptance/uptake of mRNA vaccines for future pathogen threats (as well as just still-important ongoing COVID-19 booster shots). This will especially be an issue if people associate the COVID-19 vaccine with mRNA vax technology that can be leveraged rather quickly in producing and disseminating effective, safe vaccines.

This "malleable middle" is important for journalists and public health promotion campaigns to consider with respect to how misinformation is presented in stories (alongside or in absence of accurate information and ordering too) given the potential for "fair and balanced" to risk platforming and false equivocation as well as reader anchoring bias of the first claim they are presented with in the story (often the mistruth) coloring interpretation of corrective fact that might follow.

Link to story in reply. #vaccines #policy #publichealth #sociology #science

New from Nature: "Six ways to put the public at the heart of science and policy" offers evidence-based recommendations for constructively responding to the challenges of communicating science for policy in a populist world.

The recommendations, vetted and refined by external peer-reviewers, are the product of a working group that included over two dozen researchers and practitioners from across fields and around the globe, to include our Stony Brook University colleague Musa al-Gharbi, a professor at the Stony Brook University School of Communication and Journalism.

The authors call on governments and academic institutions to "rethink how scientists, policymakers, and the public work together," with the six steps put forth detailing mechanisms to proactively increase public engagement and foster trust. As the article notes, "People are more likely to support - and champion - science advice that they helped to generate." This insight aligns deeply with the Alda Center's mission.

Alda Center ED Laura Lindenfeld commended the paper for its emphasis “that we cannot treat effective science communication and engagement as an afterthought or bolt-on skill; it must be built as core infrastructure across the organizations and industries where science is created and used. At the Alda Center for Communicating Science, we likewise focus on helping people connect clearly and authentically around complex ideas at the heart of science and innovation so that communication becomes a strategic asset rather than a box to check.”

Free access to the article and the recommendations in full are available here: https://lnkd.in/e-QMGwEH

Illustration: David Parkins

#PublicEngagement #SciComm #ScienceCommunication #SciencePolicy #AldaMethod

#News Missing vaccine meeting records expose media’s selective curiosity: In brief

* One government source says senior ministers and officials met on 13 August 2021, shortly before Cabinet approved Pfizer vaccination for 12- to 15-year-olds.
* The Ministry of Health has not identified minutes or notes from that meeting, while DPMC says meeting records do not exist.
* Four days later, CV TAG minutes recorded that myocarditis-related wording had been removed from communications, with no explanation why.
* The question is not whether vaccines worked, but why this flawed record trail has drawn so little interest from the mainstream media.




Where is the media? 

New Zealand’s mainstream media have shown little interest in flawed records and the removal of safety wording around the teen Pfizer decision, despite treating far smaller political accountability stories as newsworthy.

They spent much of the pandemic demanding high standards of evidence from critics of the COVID response.

Where is that same zeal when the response itself is being questioned? 

This is not about whether vaccines worked or whether teenagers should have been vaccinated. It is not a claim that ministers acted in bad faith. It is a story about records, risk communication and public accountability.

The record trail

Centrist has already reported the core facts. The missing meeting records and the changed myocarditis wording are covered in detail here and here.

Documents assembled by Aly Cook and Sue Grey, through OIA requests, show senior ministers and officials met on 13 August 2021, shortly before Cabinet approved extending Pfizer vaccination to 12- to 15-year-olds.

The Ministry of Health has not identified minutes or notes from that meeting, while DPMC says meeting records do not exist, despite holding related briefing material prepared for then-prime minister Jacinda Ardern, which it has refused to release.  

Four days later, CV TAG minutes recorded that references to longer dosing intervals and myocarditis risk had been removed from communications. The minutes added: “This has been actioned.”

The documents do not show who made that decision or whether it was made at a 13 August meeting. They do not prove wrongdoing. But they do leave a serious gap in the public record.

Why has this drawn so little interest from the mainstream media?

The contrast with other political coverage is hard to miss

In June 2026, RNZ reported that Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson had apologised after being caught driving 11km/h over the speed limit.

If a speeding ticket for driving a small amount over the limit draws media coverage, then a missing record trail before a major child vaccination decision should surely clear the same undefined threshold many times over. For the record, we wonder about Davidson’s modest speeding and apology being newsworthy and other similarly empty stories, but that is not our point. 

The bar…

https://lnkd.in/etjc7uka

Reading these fact-check sections of the BBC and of Reuters is fascinating. I find it so interesting that we have the collective knowledge of all of humanity and in some minds, conspiracy theories persist. I know there is psychology behind it. But still: it is fascinating to me.

This is an important message for pregnant women. 👇
This ECDC animation explains how vaccines protect both you and your baby - before, during, and after pregnancy 👉 https://lnkd.in/dGcEzZm7

A parent refused to have their child vaccinated because they believed the vaccine would "𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒊𝒍 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒉𝒊𝒍𝒅'𝒔 𝒃𝒍𝒐𝒐𝒅."
Sometimes ago, while volunteering on a community health outreach, I heard something that has stayed with me ever since.
At first, I was surprised but the more I listened, the more I realized something.

Many people aren't refusing vaccines because they don't care about their children. They're making decisions based on what they've been told, what they've seen, or what they've come to believe over the years.

At that moment, I realized that science isn't just about knowing the facts. It is also about communicating them in ways people can understand and trust.

So, let's simplify one thing.

Think of your immune system as your body's security team.

When a new germ enters your body for the first time, your immune system has to figure out who it is and how to fight it. That takes time and sometimes, the infection gets the upper hand.
So here it is,
Vaccines give your immune system a "practice session."

When administered, they safely introduce your immune system to a harmless version, or just a weakened form of a germ, so that if the real one ever shows up, your body already knows what to do.

It is preparation, not punishment.
Protection, not harm.
And that is why vaccines are one of the most powerful tools in preventing infectious diseases.

I think I am beginning to realize that some of the biggest public health challenges aren't always scientific, they are communication challenges.

Maybe this is another story worth exploring.

So tell me, what is one health myth you've heard that you later found out wasn't true? I would love to hear it.
 #Vaccines #Immunization #PublicHealth #HealthEducation #HealthAdvocacy

📱 In a world of endless health information, trust is more valuable than ever.

The challenge isn't simply fighting misinformation. It’s creating environments where reliable information is easy to find and understand.

#HealthLiteracy #DigitalHealth #ScienceCommunication #PublicHealth

📌 https://lnkd.in/d3wVkgpv

Everyone "knows" Americans have turned against science. However, the data say otherwise.

The Pew Research Center's latest survey, published January 2026: 77% of U.S. adults have confidence in scientists to act in the public's best interest.

Scientists rank at the top of every group Pew measures, tied with the military, far ahead of journalists, business leaders, and elected officials.

Your doctor? Still the single most trusted source of health information in America. 85% of adults trust their own physician to make the right recommendations (KFF, 2025).

Vaccines? 84% of Americans say the benefits of the MMR vaccine outweigh the risks. That includes 78% of Republicans (Pew, November 2025).

Yes, trust dipped. Confidence in scientists was 87% in April 2020 and bottomed out near 73% in 2023. It has been recovering since. A real dent, not a collapse.

So why does it feel like half the country has abandoned medicine?
1.      Social media rewards the outliers. Distrust is engaging content. Trust is boring. Nobody goes viral posting "got my kid vaccinated, saw my doctor, everything was fine."
2.      The loudest voices are the most invested. A small, highly motivated minority of skeptics produces a wildly disproportionate share of the noise, and entire media careers are now built on monetizing doubt.
3.      We conflate institutions with science. Trust in the FDA fell from 65% to 53% in two years. Trust in the CDC and public health officials dropped by double digits. People are angry at agencies, insurers, and pharma pricing. That anger gets misread as rejection of science itself.
4.      Politics. The current administration has cut research funding, slashed the federal science workforce, and installed an HHS secretary who fired the entire CDC vaccine advisory committee. Confidence in federal health agencies has slid across the board since the inauguration, and the partisan gap is now enormous: 90% of Democrats trust scientists versus 65% of Republicans.

➡️ None of this means we can relax. Only 53% of Americans are confident that childhood vaccines have had enough safety testing, and among parents of young kids it is 44%. That is where the erosion in trust is real, and where clear, humble communication matters most.

But if you are a clinician or scientist feeling like the public has turned on you: they haven't. Most people trust you more than almost anyone else in public life. Act like it. Speak up accordingly.

So happy to see adult questions about vaccines answered using the best available evidence. Thank you!!

📊 9 out of 10 Americans struggle to understand and use health information. Let that sink in.

We talk a lot about access to healthcare, but what about access to understanding healthcare?

I've been front facing with patients for over 5 years, and I can assure you - people are completely unaware about what their health means for them.

Health literacy is one of the most overlooked drivers of health disparities in this country. When people can't understand a diagnosis, a prescription label, or a discharge form, the system has failed them before they even walk out the door.

The numbers are stark:

🔹 Low health literacy costs the U.S. $238 billion annually

🔹 55% of Black adults have low health literacy, compared to 32% of white adults

🔹 Improving health literacy could prevent nearly 1 million hospital visits per year!

This isn't a patient problem. It's a systemic design problem and its exactly why health education should be a form of healthcare.

As someone pursuing a career at the intersection of Public Health and Health Sciences, I believe every patient encounter is also a health education moment. We have to do better.

💬 What's one way your organization is addressing health literacy?

#HealthLiteracy #HealthEquity #PublicHealth #HealthcareAdministration #HealthEducation #SDOH #HealthDisparities #UMHB #DHSc #MPHIntern #HealthandWellness #WomenInPublicHealth

A new KFF poll found that 8% of adults believe or lean toward believing four of the most common vaccine myths, while more than half view all of them as false. Swipe through for the facts behind each claim.

Excited to collab with Alexander Sundermann, DrPH, AL-CIP, FAPIC on this graphic!

Want to spot the next misleading claim before it spreads? Check out our free guide for evaluating health claims: https://lnkd.in/enG2hAXE

Make it make sense. 

Trust, once lost, is extraordinarily difficult to regain.
The Greatest Casualty of COVID Was Trust https://buff.ly/tlQxdWP
My column in Rasmussen Reports.

We stand committed to changing the trajectory of our children’s health, for the better.

And rest assured, we won’t stop until we do.

Continuing good information about how vaccines save children's lives! Flu vaccine prevented death and serious illness among US children. Great to have this vaccine available to keep America's kids healthy!

The days of skipping vaccines and relying on a strategy of free-riding and hiding in the herd to avoid measles are over. https://lnkd.in/gRcbwE9a

🛠️ Tool of the Week: Practical Resources for Immunization Economics

As countries take on greater responsibility for financing their immunization programmes, understanding where resources come from, and where they are spent, is becoming increasingly important.

This practical World Health Organization guide shows how to systematically track immunization expenditures using the SHA 2011 framework, making data more consistent, comparable, and useful for decision-making.

This guidance:
🧩 Defines what counts as immunization expenditure within the SHA 2011 Health Accounts framework
🔄 Shows how to allocate shared health system costs (e.g. salaries and facility costs) to immunization
📊 Separates routine immunization from campaigns while tracking spending by financing source, provider, and input
✅ Includes quality checks to improve the consistency and comparability of expenditure estimates
📈 Helps turn expenditure data into policy insights for planning, financing, and sustainability

👉 Explore the guidance here: https://lnkd.in/ekE9xgha

🔎 Looking for more tools like this? Browse our full Guidance, Tools & Data collection here: 👉 https://lnkd.in/ef25VNyM