Key Summary
- 67% of UK adults see health misinformation as a serious threat.
- 17% UK adults have been personally affected by misleading health advice.
- It is higher among people from ethnic minorities.
Health misinformation poses a major threat to public health and is directly widening existing health inequalities across the UK, according to research carried out by Ipsos for the Academy of Medical Sciences.
The nationally representative polling shows that while 89% of UK adults believe misleading health information puts lives at risk, a stark disconnect exists between how vulnerable people think society is compared to themselves.
Two-thirds of the public (67%) view health misinformation as a serious problem, and 69% believe it is difficult for the general public to spot false health advice.
However, only 28% of respondents believe they personally find it difficult to spot misleading content.
Deprived communities and minority groups most exposed
The survey revealed that nearly one in five UK adults (17%) report having been personally affected by misleading health information. However, the impact is more on vulnerable demographics:
- 27% of people from ethnic minority backgrounds
- 26% of individuals living with long-term health conditions
- 22% of people residing in the UK's most deprived areas
Crucially, those most affected by misinformation are also significantly less likely to access or trust established health channels. In deprived communities, only 66% of residents know where to find trustworthy health information, compared with 78% in affluent areas, with lower routine usage of official platforms such as the NHS website.
Highly visible misinformation targets
When asked which medical areas suffer most from false or misleading claims, the public identified:
- Vaccines and immunisations (56%)
- Diet, weight loss, and nutrition (41%)
- Cancer treatments and alternative therapies (36%)
- Supplements and wellness products (33%)
Conversely, other critical areas saw lower public awareness of misinformation risks; only 7% of respondents identified fertility and reproductive health-including IVF and contraception-as being severely impacted by misleading advice.
The AI and internet trust deficit
The findings also highlight a sharp divide between where people search for health advice and where they place their trust.
While 44% of adults regularly use search engines for health queries, only 2% name search engines as their most trusted source.
Similarly, 16% of adults (rising to 28% among ethnic minority groups and 24% among 25-to-34-year-olds) regularly use AI tools for health information, yet just 13% consider AI-generated health advice trustworthy.
In contrast, traditional healthcare channels remain overwhelmingly trusted: 49% of the public trust their GP most for health information, followed by 37% who place their primary trust in the NHS website.
No other channel-including social media, search engines, or news outlets-is trusted most by more than 3% of the population.
Professor Ann John OBE FMedSci, Professor of Public Health and Psychiatry at Swansea University, said: “People living in deprived communities, ethnic minority groups, and those with long-term health conditions are more likely to be affected and may be less aware of trusted sources.
“Some may have lower trust in health organisations based on previous experiences, so health misinformation can widen existing health inequalities. Improving health and media literacy, promoting trusted local voices, and providing culturally appropriate communication are essential.”
Professor Sir Andrew Morris CBE FRSE FMedSci, President of the Academy of Medical Sciences, said: “The polling data reveals as much about how people receive information as it does about what they currently believe. A message is far more likely to land when it comes from a source and a community people already trust, regardless of how strong the underlying evidence is.
“The challenge for medical science is not only to produce reliable evidence, but to ensure it reaches people in ways they can act on – through voices they recognise, in places they already go for information.”
