This travesty is due to RFK, Jr., the man who nominated him as HHS Secretary, antivaxx organizations that profit from selling fake treatments instead of safe, effective vaccines, and social media companies that value clicks over the public's health.

https://lnkd.in/eaJ5Jrjw

Public health communication has never been more important.

In today's polarized media environment, evidence alone isn't always enough.
Drawing on recent research by Jebril and colleagues (2026) and Communication and Culture, LLC's collaboration with Howard University on vaccine hesitancy, this article explores why trust, culture, and strategic communication are essential to improving public health.

I hope it sparks meaningful conversation among public health and communication professionals.
#HealthCommunication #PublicHealth #HealthEquity #RiskCommunication #HealthLiteracy #CommunicationStrategy

PubPeer has taken on the task of reviewing papers of low quality and with so many issues that they should never have been published. And here is Peter McCullough who has 37, yes only 37 (irony), of such papers that should either be retracted or have never been published at all.

https://lnkd.in/gUA9snpW

Always show critical analysis when assessing the quality of a paper issued from a known antivaxxer and conspiracy theorist.
This is the results of a PubPeer analysis of publications from Nicolas Hulscher. Concerned ? Hell, yes, as 17 of his publications have been tagged in this platform for being of such low quality that they should be retracted or should never have been published at all.

https://lnkd.in/e-NNudKd

Les Etats-Unis vont finalement fournir à l'Alliance du vaccin (Gavi) les 600 millions de dollars de financement qui avaient été gelés l'an passé par le ministre de la Santé vaccinosceptique de Trump.
➡️ https://lnkd.in/d-fpmh-Z

We have seen the likes of Nicolas Hulscher and Peter McCullough making false claims around clots and trying to relate them with COVID vaccines. They have recently been quoting a study misleading you all the Therry paper had nothing at all to do with the COVID vaccines. But what they are also omitting is the wealth of data confirming the protective effect of COVID vaccines against COVID induced clotting issues.

For those who are not aware, there is zero scientific evidence that suggests drinking your own urine can regulate your estrogen production. Urine is a human byproduct, meaning it is filtered waste your body is expelling after liquid passes through your kidneys. Not only is it not medical treatment, and certainly not a form of HRT; science has shown it can also be dangerous to consume, causing dehydration and even kidney damage, per the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Medical professionals have responded in horror to the trend, urging people to please not try this at home.

“I can’t believe it’s 2026 and I have to say this out loud,” Rachel Gelman, a pelvic floor physical therapist and sex counselor, said in a video responding to the trend. “Don’t drink your pee. If you don’t want to do hormone therapy, that’s fine, you don’t have to. But drinking your pee is not going to manage whatever symptoms you’re having or do something to protect you from whatever you think it happens from hormone therapy.”

Another misinformation post from McCullough Foundation . First, the spike test he refers to has never been validated. Second, there is no large clinical trial that has ever confirmed the utility of such test. Third, there is no data from a confirmatory trial that has set a spike antibody threshold level of any relevance. Fourth, the only reason McCullough Foundation pushes such lies is to sell their spike detox regimen which is not only not FDA approved, but has never been proven to be either safe or efficacious.

Artificial intelligence continues to demonstrate its potential to strengthen healthcare systems and expand access to important health knowledge.
So, in a world driven by clickbait and 20-second attention spans, where AI-generated influencers are becoming increasingly realistic, how easy is it for the public to distinguish between genuine health education and marketing disguised as expertise? Where do ethical practice and transparency fit into this new landscape, and do they still matter?

I share what I learn from my professors, clinicians, and peer-reviewed research because I acknowledge most people neither have the time nor the opportunity (or desire) to immerse themselves in that kind of medical jargon. What we are witnessing is that AI, in many ways, is dismantling the high walls surrounding academic research and clinical studies by synthesizing and disseminating knowledge around the world, in creative ways and with remarkable speed.

We already know that AI is here to stay and has its place within healthcare communication, but how do those of us entrusted with the care of others preserve the public trust while embracing technologies that make knowledge more widely available? As the boundaries between genuine clinical expertise and persuasive digital content continue to blur, what responsibilities must we commit to in this convergence of expertise and influence?

Ultimately, we know that access to information is not the same as medical knowledge, nor do popularity and "likes" equate to learning, clinical competence, or sound application. Clinical judgment is developed through years of rigorous education, supervised training, scientific inquiry, and experience caring for patients. This makes the relationship between healthcare professionals and the public more -not less- important. Social validation is not the same as expertise. The challenge is ensuring that, as technology advances, our commitment to truth, ethical responsibility, and the public's trust advances with it.  

#ArtificialIntelligence #PublicHealth #HealthCommunication #MedicalEducation #EvidenceBasedMedicine #NaturopathicMedicine

https://lnkd.in/g3atRika.

On lit souvent que la confiance des citoyens dans la science s'effondre. Est-ce vrai ? A qui ce récit profite-t-il politiquement ?

Le Baromètre de l'esprit critique, l'Eurobaromètre, le baromètre Edelman…chaque nouvelle enquête (ou du moins : ce qu’en dit sa reprise médiatique) semble confirmer le même récit d'un décrochage généralisé : la confiance dans la science s’effrite dans les opinions publiques. 
🙇Le point qui doit nous inquiéter, c’est que l'administration Trump en a même fait un argument officiel pour justifier ses coupes budgétaires dans la recherche, voire ses discours antivax : il faudrait « dépolitiser » la science pour restaurer une confiance perdue.
Sauf qu'en creusant les grandes enquêtes académiques de référence (68 pays, 72.000 personnes sondées dans Nature Human Behaviour en 2025) le tableau qui apparaît est très différent : une confiance globale stable, et plutôt élevée.
📈Alors comment expliquer un tel écart entre le sentiment ambiant et ce que disent les chiffres ?
C'est la question que je pose dans ce texte, à partir du dossier que la revue Nature a consacré au sujet début juillet (👉🏻https://lnkd.in/d7rNNCEW).
💬 Premier constat, d'ordre méthodologique : « confiance dans la science » ne veut pas dire la même chose selon qu'on interroge la confiance dans l'institution, dans la compétence des chercheurs, ou dans leur volonté d'agir pour l'intérêt général. Une bonne partie du sentiment de crise vient de la confusion entre ces objets.
🤯La seconde réflexion est plus inconfortable : elle touche à l'intérêt qu'ont certains acteurs politiques à entretenir ce récit, quitte à s'affranchir des données. Car la question de savoir si les citoyens ont ou non confiance dans la science a une valeur politique cruciale.
Dire que la confiance est en crise, c'est pouvoir s'autoriser plus facilement à faire de la politique sans la boussole de la science : après tout, les citoyens n'en voudraient pas.
Dire, à l'inverse, que la science a su garder la confiance des citoyens quand la politique l'a perdue, c'est parier sur la valeur de l'evidence-based policy making et s'engager à en structurer les procédures.
🗳️ Dans tous les cas, d'ici 2027, le débat public aurait tout intérêt à mieux documenter cette question : quel rôle les Français veulent-tels donner aux scientifiques sur la place publique, qu'en attendent-ils, de quoi les créditent-ils, et où situent-ils la frontière légitime entre science et décision ? Leurs réponses à ces questions varient-elles selon leur camp politique ? Sans cette donnée, invoquer la valeur de la science en politique reste une pétition de principe plutôt qu'une stratégie porteuse politiquement.

📚 A lire ici sur le site Evidences : https://lnkd.in/dgF2wRZ6

Science, Pseudoscience and the Decline of Public Health
Dr. Kevin Kavanagh argues that public health in the United States is being threatened by a growing conflict between mainstream medical science and pseudoscience, especially around vaccines. He criticizes efforts by the Department of Health and Human Services with their challenging of journal retractions, protecting flawed anti-vaccine studies, and blocking publication of vaccine safety and effectiveness research. Kavanagh explains that passive reporting systems such as VAERS can identify potential safety signals but cannot prove causation by themselves. He contrasts questionable vaccine claims with large, methodologically stronger studies showing vaccine safety, including research on aluminum adjuvants and adverse events. He also defends established study designs used to evaluate vaccine effectiveness, noting that randomized trials can be unethical in public health contexts. Beyond academic disputes, he warns that undermining publication integrity damages public trust, weakens vaccination programs, worsens disease control, and contributes to scientist attrition and our nation’s brain drain to other countries. He concludes that data quality, consistent scientific standards, and public health consequences must guide policy. Health Watch USA(sm) meeting. July 15, 2026.

View YouTube Video: https://lnkd.in/ebU62f4a

Download PDF of PowerPoint Slides: https://lnkd.in/e8uTmaSQ 

Haven't registered yet for our upcoming seminar 'Ethical Principles in Legal Context: Vaccine Mandates During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Australia', presented in partnership with the Centre for Health Law + Policy. ???

There's still time to secure your place. 🔗https://lnkd.in/gcWgd6CM
Thursday 30th July 2pm (ASWT) / 4pm (ASET)

We look forward to seeing you online!

Katie Attwell, Marco Rizzi, Amy T., Shevaun Drislane
UWA School of Social Sciences UWA Law School

An infamous MAGA influencer has raked in millions for his children's charity, but almost all of the money is lining his own pockets.

Rising measles cases show that vaccine confidence is a communication challenge. Learn how public health leaders can build trust in African American communities.

The first article of my PhD is out, published in La Presse Médicale.

With Coralie Chevallier and Edgar Dubourg, we explore the mechanics of personalised health communication: why it works, its benefits in terms of health outcomes, and how to implement it — from mass-media campaigns to one-on-one consultations.

This first article lays the theoretical groundwork for the rest of my PhD, dedicated to personalising anti-smoking prevention messages based on personality traits.

Link: https://lnkd.in/dqxEnQrd

A special thank you to my PhD supervisors, Coralie Chevallier and Daniel Nettle, for their guidance and support. | 14 comments on LinkedIn

The Health and Human Services secretary is on the hook for the impossible: proving that Trump’s delusions about vaccines and autism are real.

Here is a great example of a state that seems to understand public health and the importance of vaccinations #publichealth #measles https://lnkd.in/dAY_NsQR

This is great news for the children of the world.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr has been blocking US participation in Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance for more than a year since the Brussels replenishment conference held on June 25, 2025. Gavi estimated that this loss of funding and the resulting missed vaccines might have led to as many as 600,000 child deaths over the next strategic period and plans were made to hold back many vaccines that countries wanted.

The funds involved include $600 million from FY2025 and FY2026 which has been appropriated by Congress but not released. At a hearing in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary Rubio pledged at the beginning of June that the State Department is "going to re-engage on the issue of Gavi". Susan Collins, the Chair of the appropriations committee told Politico today that the full $600 million would be provided before the funds expire in September.

With the return of US funding, Gavi will be approaching its full financing allowing it to support countries to obtain access to the vaccines that they need including outbreak vaccine stockpiles. We await details on any restrictions on use of the funds that may be put in place.

🧪 Donald #Trump continue d’affirmer que les vaccins pédiatriques, notamment le #vaccin RRO (rougeole-rubéole-oreillons), seraient responsables de l’autisme. Robert F. #Kennedy Jr. poursuit la même stratégie : partir d’une conviction idéologique et chercher ensuite des éléments pour la confirmer.

💡Le problème est simple : les preuves scientifiques ne vont pas dans ce sens. Depuis plus de vingt ans, de nombreuses études de grande ampleur n’ont trouvé aucun lien causal entre le vaccin RRO et les troubles du spectre de l’autisme. Les rares études invoquées pour défendre cette hypothèse ont été rétractées ou sévèrement critiquées pour leurs faiblesses méthodologiques.

Pendant que l’on entretient une controverse artificielle, la réalité est tout autre : les 🇺🇸 et d’autres pays connaissent une recrudescence majeure de la #rougeole, directement liée à la baisse de la couverture vaccinale et au climat de défiance envers les vaccins.

https://lnkd.in/g27v_WPg

Le plus inquiétant est peut-être ailleurs : cette question est désormais analysée sous un angle #politique, certains stratèges s’interrogeant sur l’impact électoral du discours vaccino-sceptique à l’approche des élections de mi-mandat. La science devient un outil de communication politique, alors qu’elle devrait rester le fondement des décisions de #santé #publique.

https://lnkd.in/gvAskSMz

#Vaccination #Rougeole #SantéPublique #EvidenceBasedMedicine #Science #Autisme #Prévention #Trump #RFKJr

https://lnkd.in/gsQw-b93

WHO: battered but still indispensable!
Even as the World Health Organization absorbs the sharpest funding contraction in its history, its role has become more visible, not less.
The US withdrawal, finalized in January 2026, stripped away roughly a fifth of the agency's budget overnight, forcing a wrenching 21 percent cut to the 2026-2027 budget and a scaling back from $5.3 billion to $4.2 billion in planned spending.
Yet the demand for what only WHO can do, coordinate a global response across 36 active emergencies, from Sudan to Gaza to the DRC, and set the technical standards that let 194 countries act on a common evidence base hasn't shrunk to match.
Its 2026 appeal for nearly $1 billion in emergency funding, covering everything from mpox and cholera outbreaks to medical evacuations out of conflict zones, is less a routine ask than a test of whether multilateral health governance survives its own funding crisis.
The innovation here isn't technological but structural: WHO is pushing more decision making and resources toward national and local actors, betting that a leaner, more distributed model can preserve its convening power even as its checkbook shrinks.
Whether that reset produces a more resilient institution or simply a diminished one is the open question and it's one that will shape how the world handles the next pandemic, not just this year's emergencies.

In the United States, deaths and serious illness from vaccine-preventable diseases are rare, thanks to vaccines. So it’s hard to find those rare and powerful stories about people getting sick or dying from vaccine-preventable diseases. Meanwhile, unscrupulous anti-vaccine activists are happy to take that rare and powerful story of vaccine adverse events and amplify it as if it is the norm.

Health literacy is one of the strongest determinants of health. The World Health Organization notes that in the United States, health literacy is a stronger predictor of an individual's health status than income, employment status, education level, or race and ethnicity.

Yet only about 1 in 8 U.S. adults has proficient health literacy.

If health literacy influences so many of our health decisions, how do we build it?

One promising place to start is school.

Some countries have begun integrating health literacy into school curricula. Researchers have explored approaches ranging from problem-based learning and digital media literacy to evidence-based medicine curricula. While many have improved health knowledge, gains in broader health literacy skills have been mixed. Others have focused on specific diseases rather than the transferable skills needed to navigate health information throughout life.

That's what makes a new study from Nepal so interesting.

Rather than emphasizing health facts alone, researchers focused on helping ninth-grade students build the skills to access, understand, appraise, and apply health information. Over seven weeks, students practiced these competencies through discussions, role-playing, case studies, and real-world scenarios.

Compared with students who did not participate, they demonstrated significant improvements in health literacy, self-efficacy, and most health-promoting behaviors. Exercise behavior didn't improve significantly, and because the schools couldn't be randomly assigned, the findings should be viewed as encouraging rather than definitive.

Still, the overall direction is compelling.

Health literacy isn't just another chapter in a health class.

It's a foundational life skill.

One that deserves to be taught with the same intentionality as reading, writing, and critical thinking. | 37 comments on LinkedIn

NEW from me-
RFK Jr. has been known as the chief vaccine skeptic in the Trump administration.

But it is the president recently who has been pressing Kennedy to do more on vaccines.

Trump wants to see whether autism rates drop if the list of recommended childhood vaccines is cut back.

At a lunch at his golf course in northern Virginia in May, Trump told Kennedy he had the yips.

And many more hard-won bits of reporting from talking to 20+ people in my story here: https://lnkd.in/ebkBZhNS

Religions support vaccination… So to claim vaccination exemption as discrimination is somewhat ironic. If the Pope himself, in the name of God, supports vaccination, do you think yourself above God himself in making such claim ?? Religious exemptions for vaccines are not supported by religion… Period.