If you’re a medical writer, misinformation isn’t new. Every time we sit down to interpret data, review a study, or draft a deliverable, we’re working in an environment where inaccurate or distorted information is circulating. It can appear in academic spaces, public discourse, and now in AI-generated content.
We’ve always fact-checked, evaluated study design, and validated our sources. What’s changing for us is the volume of information, the speed at which information (or misinformation) spreads, and the stakes. More discernment and critical thinking are required of us than ever before in an era where there’s less shared agreement about what counts as credible in the first place.
If we can articulate how we navigate that, we can elevate our value as medical writers in our clients’ eyes. First, we need to get back to basics: what misinformation is, how it spreads so quickly, the impact it has on our profession, and simple tools to handle it in our everyday lives.
What is Health Misinformation?
Health misinformation is the spread of information that is false, inaccurate, or misleading when held up against the most current evidence. It is not a new phenomenon – consider that anti-vaccine sentiment has been fueled by misleading information from both consumers and academics for decades – but it’s been accelerated by widespread use of social media to spread a lot of information, very quickly.
“An infodemic is an overabundance of information, both online and offline. It includes deliberate attempts to disseminate wrong information.”
– World Health Organization, in response to Covid-19 management
Misinformation vs. Disinformation
While we talk about misinformation the most, disinformation is a critical component of this “infodemic” we’re still living through. Just as critical for medical writers is awareness of the differences between misinformation and disinformation. While misinformation is considered the spread of false information – and can encompass disinformation in its definition – disinformation is explicitly considered the intentional spread of false information to serve an agenda, often for financial or political gain.
As medical writers, we often serve as intermediaries between new research and how consumers receive it. Consider asking:
- Who paid for this research?
- Is this research peer-reviewed?
- Who benefits from my believing these conclusions?
- How does it fit into the wider body of evidence?
The goal of a critical lens isn’t to sow doubt, cynicism, or even a “conspiracy” mindset, but to think critically and contextually about new findings, rather than simply taking them at face value.
Misinformation — and especially disinformation — feeds on fear when it offers simple, emotionally compelling answers to complicated questions. When those simplified narratives shape a patient’s perspective, responding with more complicated terms and evidence won’t do the job. If we don’t first understand where their beliefs came from, we shouldn’t expect acceptance of evidence-based care.”
– Zsuzsa Csik, MD, CME Writer
How Did Misinformation Become So Widespread?
Before the Covid-19 pandemic accelerated the spread of misinformation on social media, claims that something was “fake news” were frequent in public discourse. While this wasn’t exclusive to health information, the erosion of trust in public institutions, including legacy media outlets, government, and scientific institutions, laid the groundwork for the rise in misinformation.
This came to a head during the Covid-19 pandemic, when misinformation thrived.
Mis- and dis-information spread very differently on social media for a number of reasons:
- There are few guardrails
- People are more likely to share information that signals ideological affiliation, even if they know it’s not factually accurate.
- Exposure to misinformation increases the likelihood of believing it
- People are more likely to share misinformation that is emotionally provocative
That all remains true today. The rise of reactionary “citizen journalism” has made it difficult for scientifically rigorous institutions to continue to combat false information, particularly because conducting research and explaining why something is not correct takes time and nuance, two things that don’t go viral.
Last but certainly not least, AI-generated content has exponentially increased the sheer volume of information available to consumers on every platform.
Case Studies: The Disinformation Dozen and A Generation Deprived of HRT
The “Disinformation Dozen”
In 2021, researchers found that a significant portion of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation online could be traced back to just 12 highly visible individuals, including physicians and alternative health entrepreneurs. By the time the scale was understood, vaccine hesitancy had already taken hold.
Hormone Replacement Therapy
Another example is the association of hormone replacement therapy (HRT), particularly estrogen, with an increase in breast cancer risk. Findings supporting this idea were first published by the Women’s Health Initiative in 2002. Only in the last five years has research emerged that calls into question the misinterpretation of the original findings. However, widespread adoption of the idea that HRT increases breast cancer risk has “deprived a generation of women of HRT.”
“Misinformation costs lives.”
– World Health Organization
The Impact Misinformation Has on Medical Writers
Medical writers have always validated data. We’ve always read beyond the abstract, examined study design, meticulously fact-checked, and weighed conclusions against the broader body of evidence. Careful interpretation isn’t new to us.
What’s changed is the context in which we’re doing that work.
In the last few years, once-trusted sources have been called into question. Institutional guidance can shift quickly or disappear altogether without warning. The importance of having alternative sources of evidence has never been more apparent.
Clients may come to us with narratives that have already been shaped by social media threads or AI summaries. And the sheer volume of information increases the chance of misinformation slipping through the cracks.
So it’s not that we’re suddenly doing something we weren’t before. It’s that our judgment matters more and is tested more often.
We’re no longer just translating research; we’re contextualising it for audiences who may distrust the very institutions producing it. We’re helping clients communicate clearly in an environment where nuance doesn’t always travel well.
Because accuracy has always been the baseline expectation – as it should be – the added complexity can be hard to name, let alone scope or price appropriately.
If your work feels like more lately, you’re not imagining it. The landscape in which we communicate has been shifting, and the discernment you bring to it is a huge part of your value.
If I’ve learned anything from writing in a time of rampant misinformation, it’s that we can’t do this alone. We each need to be a light for someone else. In that spirit, here are six strategies you can return to again and again to support you.
Tired of piecing together health information from a dozen different sources? My nonfiction book breaks down exactly how to evaluate health claims. Join the waitlist today.
6 Strategies for Navigating the Misinformation Landscape
As you likely know, fellow writer, fighting misinformation is not easy. It isn’t as simple as explaining why some information is wrong, citing your sources, and calling it a day. In fact, if you’ve ever done that, you’ve likely been shouted at across the Internet void. And that can be enough to turn you off trying to fight misinformation altogether. That’s why I’ve got a wide-ranging list of resources for you.
1. Understand the influence of pre-existing ideology
Audiences don’t approach information neutrally. Ideology shapes interpretation. You don’t need to anticipate conflict, but you do need awareness. Understanding existing beliefs around a subject helps you communicate without triggering defensive responses.
2. Practice looking for misinformation where you wouldn’t expect it
Scientific journals that are not peer-reviewed, health websites and blogs, and health apps are all places where misinformation can run rampant. Prestigious-seeming scientific journals often publish for financial gain without ever undergoing a rigorous peer review process, for example.
Not all misinformation lives on social media.
- Predatory journals exist – and they can be extremely common in certain fields.
- Consumer health apps often lack rigorous validation.
- Authoritative-looking health websites often contain health misinformation.
A source can look authoritative, but that doesn’t mean it is. For example, a 2020 review article found that only 32% of cancer apps for a consumer-facing audience had accurate health information.
Authority signals are not the same as rigour.
3. Correct misinformation: it’s more effective than you might think
Psychology research has found that the “backfire effect”, or the idea that corrections entrench false beliefs, is not as powerful as we may believe. Clear corrections, repetition of accurate information, and factual sourcing do make a difference, even if you don’t see the shift in real time.
4. Teach people how to find misinformation themselves
One of the most effective interventions is teaching people how to evaluate health claims. Showing, not telling, is one of my biggest aims with my Substack, Make Sense Health. I want people to understand what goes on behind the curtain. Health literacy, lateral reading, and basic research evaluation skills empower audiences to assess future claims independently.
5. Identify credible sources of information
As I touched on above, many sources of information that were once considered credible aren’t anymore. As of this writing, the American Medical Association is launching its own independent review of the U.S. vaccine schedule, citing an “effective collapse” of the CDC’s review process.
Build a list of:
- Databases you rely on
- Journals with strong peer-review standards
- Specialty-specific experts
- Reliable reporting outlets
You can also read more about how to identify trusted sources of information on social media from the Council of Medical Specialty Societies here.
6. Build your misinformation toolkit
Whether it’s an epidemic, pandemic, or infodemic, we need a comprehensive toolkit to fight a widespread disease. Start building yours with your credible sources of information. Next, gather resources to communicate information accurately, respond to trending health narratives, and interpret information – like this tried and true checklist for spotting dodgy health claims.
Here are some of my favourite resources for these buckets. Add yours as you build out your toolkit.
Communicating information accurately
Public Health Resources for Communities offers infographics and toolkits to discuss timely public health topics.
Trust in Health and Science has a one-page messaging brief on understanding objections to public health interventions, so you can address them effectively.
Responding to trending health narratives
Infodemiology tracks and contextualises trending health narratives to provide you with real-time insights into consumer perspectives and offers weekly news updates. You can also set Google alerts for “health trends” or specific disease states to keep an eye on trending health narratives.
Interpreting information
The Coalition for Trust in Health and Science is an incredible resource for navigating the sheer volume of information out there right now, with blogs on topics like lateral reading, how to interpret data, and how to avoid spreading misinformation when news is shocking.
You should also check out my Substack, Make Sense Health, for articles that span all three of these buckets.
Communicate Health Information with Confidence
Health misinformation — false, misleading, or distorted information — isn’t new. What is new is the scale and speed at which it circulates, and the way that shift is reshaping our work as medical writers.
We’re not doing something fundamentally different from what we’ve always done. But we are doing it in a more complex environment—one that requires sharper discernment, greater contextualisation, and a wider tolerance for uncertainty.
The six strategies above help sharpen your judgment and give you the tools to communicate clearly. What’s harder is articulating the value of that invisible labour. Because accuracy has always been expected of us, it can be difficult to explain why this work now takes more time, more thought, and more strategic positioning.
That’s the work I do in mentorships: helping medical writers like you position themselves as bringing high-level strategic value to the table, not just baseline competence. If you’re ready to start charging in alignment with your expertise, explore mentorship options today.
FAQs about Fighting Health Misinformation
Can you recommend reliable sources to verify the truth of a story?
Start with triangulation.
- Trace the claim back to its original source (usually a study).
- Read beyond the abstract.
- Compare findings against systematic reviews or guidelines.
- Assess funding sources and conflicts of interest.
Then contextualise. A statistically significant finding is not always clinically meaningful.
Always ask: who is it profiting if you believe this?
Which sources are most reliable for accurate news?
Reputable national and international outlets with strong editorial standards generally apply rigorous fact-checking. That said, no outlet is bias-free.
Use trusted journalism as a starting point and verify primary sources when possible.
Are there tools that help identify AI-generated misinformation?
No tool is perfect. But you can:
- Cross-check claims across independent sources.
- Verify cited studies actually exist.
- Watch for vague citations or fabricated journal names.
- Use AI detection tools cautiously. No tool I know of can flag misinformation, and AI detection tools are generally unreliable.
How can I improve my ability to identify misinformation?
Practice. Take time when reading a study. Don’t just read the abstract and conclusion (don’t feel bad; we all do it.) Question everything, and also hold that science is always evolving and we can’t know everything. I’d also surround yourself with trusted resources on being health- and digitally literate, like those shared above.
What role do fact-checking organisations play in combating online misinformation?
Fact-checking organisations play perhaps one of the most crucial roles in fighting online misinformation, but they can’t do it alone. As medical writers, we meet people in different ways: in the doctor’s office, in educational courses, and in brochures about potential medications. We influence how evidence is framed and presented to our audience, and that is a different but equally important role.
