How Should Physicians Respond to Medical Misinformation?

“you can’t have science without emotionally connecting with the person across from you” – Dr. Mike

In a MedPage Today conversation moderated by Dr. Jeremy Faust, Dr. Paul Offit, and Dr. Mike Varshavski discussed how physicians can respond to the growing spread of medical misinformation.

The discussion began with a practical question: with misinformation widespread and amplified in high-profile spaces, what is the most effective way for physicians to respond?

Dr. Varshavski emphasized the importance of engagement, particularly on social media platforms where health information circulates widely. He argued that physicians need to participate in these spaces to ensure accurate information is represented and to reach individuals who are uncertain or vaccine-hesitant. In his view, the setting, format, and communicator matter. Engagement requires preparation, emotional intelligence, and an understanding of how audiences consume information.

Dr. Offit focused on the structure of scientific debate. He cautioned that live debates with professional anti-vaccine advocates can create misleading equivalence, especially when rapid claims are presented without proper context. He emphasized that scientific disagreements are best resolved through peer review, reproducibility, and transparent evidence rather than rhetorical exchange.

Both physicians acknowledged the personal toll of public engagement, including harassment and threats. They also agreed that scientists and physicians are not formally trained in public communication, yet public trust increasingly depends on it. Clear explanation of evidence, transparency about uncertainty, and acknowledgment of past missteps were identified as essential components of maintaining credibility.

The conversation underscored that protecting scientific integrity requires both rigorous evidence and thoughtful communication tailored to the audience, format, and purpose.