Re: https://www.hifa.org/dgroups-rss/5th-edelman-trust-barometer-special-rep...
Further to the publication of the Edelman report, Nature has published an editorial. Extracts and a comment from me below. Read online. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44360-026-00136-8
==
Editorial
Published: 08 May 2026
Community engagement can rebuild trust in public health
Nature Health volume 1, page449 (2026) Cite this article
Trust in doctors remains high, but people frequently seek health advice from non-experts.
“Trust me, I’m a doctor,” goes the phrase. Not any more, according to a new global survey, which shows that more than half of the public are “losing trust in the healthcare system.” ...
The problem for health professionals is not so much a loss of trust but a loss of influence. Trust and legitimacy can be converted into influence through communication, engagement and involvement...
A recent symposium on ‘rebuilding trust in public health’ at Yale University lamented the poor storytelling abilities of most — but not all — public health leaders...
Training in health communication can help to tell the story of successful public health interventions...
Every public health department needs trained communicators. Some schools of public health offer online degrees such as ‘Health Communication for Social Change’...
Public health leaders should also engage with policymakers...
Positive news from the Edelmann survey was evidence that doctors and public health leaders are uniquely able to broker trust from people on both sides of controversial health issues...
At Nature Health we will support these endeavours by prioritizing research that engages with patients and communities, as mandated by the 2025 revision to the Declaration of Helsinki. We have also started publishing Policy Briefs: two-page summaries of research articles that can be printed (double-sided) on a single sheet and handed in person to a policymaker.
Trust in public health is not irretrievably broken, but all of us must do our part to strengthen it.
==
COMMENT (NPW): I'm not sure whether the editorial brings anything new to the table. It seems a little contradictory in its comments about trust in doctors, for example. '“Trust me, I’m a doctor,” goes the phrase. Not any more... The problem for health professionals is not so much a loss of trust... doctors and public health leaders are uniquely able to broker trust.'
It's also curious that the editorial says little if anything about the key findings of the Edelman report: [ https://www.edelman.com/sites/g/files/aatuss191/files/2026-04/2026%20Ede... ]
- Globally, people are significantly less confident in making health decisions.
- Healthcare providers are competing with peers, creators, and artificial intelligence for attention and influence.
32% of people believe that Animal protein is healthier than plant-based
32% believe that Fluoride in water is harmful or unhelpful to health
31% believe that Risk of childhood vaccinations outweighs benefits
28% believe Raw milk is healthier than pasteurized
25% believe Acetaminophen/paracetamol use during pregnancy causes autism
25% believe Vaccines are used for population control
70% of people worldwide believe that at least one of the above false statements is true.
And one of the key findings is: Despite Declines Across Healthcare Ecosystem, My Doctor Remains Most Trusted
Finally, the central message of the editorial 'Community engagement can rebuild trust in public health'. It is debatable whether this is the key and, if so, what this means in practice. The editorial says: 'Public health interventions and health research should be co-designed with communities, rather than implemented from the top down... Public health leaders should also engage with policymakers... At Nature Health we will support these endeavours by prioritizing research that engages with patients and communities...'. This may be desirable but I am unaware of any evidence that this has a major impact on the availability and use of reliable healthcare information, nor on protection against misinformation.
From our discussions on HIFA over the past 20 years it is clear there is no quick fix. What is needed is political and financial commitment to strengthen the global evidence ecosystem. HIFA has been advocating for this and it is the #1 conclusion of our global consultation published in 2024. Six months later, WHO launched a new initiative Global Coalition for Evidence whose purpose is to srengthen the global evidence ecosystem. In our official statement to the World Health Assembly this week we shall be commending WHO on this development. We are now working on a technical brief for WHO to be submitted by December 2026. We alone are responsible for funding this. Please contact me if your organisation can help: neil@hifa.org We anticipate that by 2027 WHO will explicitly champion universal access to reliable healthcare inforamtion for all, with support from HIFA and other partners.
Best wishes, Neil
HIFA profile: Neil Pakenham-Walsh is coordinator of HIFA (Healthcare Information For All), a global health community that brings all stakeholders together around the shared goal of universal access to reliable healthcare information. HIFA has 20,000 members in 180 countries, interacting in four languages and representing all parts of the global evidence ecosystem. HIFA is administered by Global Healthcare Information Network, a UK-based nonprofit in official relations with the World Health Organization. Email: neil@hifa.org