People Aren’t Stupid: They’re Wary of False Information About COVID-19

Here is a brief overview of the article, which highlights that social media does not exert a negative influence on COVID-19 vaccination.
Like

Share this post

Choose a social network to share with, or copy the URL to share elsewhere

This is a representation of how your post may appear on social media. The actual post will vary between social networks

Explore the Research

SpringerLink
SpringerLink SpringerLink

The difference between COVID-19 vaccine intent and uptake is not associated with exposure to misinformation - Discover Public Health

Prior to the widespread availability of COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, the intent to vaccinate was a significant concern and subject of research. Misinformation about COVID-19 on the internet, often referred to as the “infodemic,” was seen as a major impediment to vaccine acceptance. We compared the COVID-19 vaccine intent estimates from 2020 with the actual COVID-19 vaccine uptake and analyzed misinformation exposure levels in 46 countries. In 13 countries, vaccine uptake exceeds the initial intent by 5.98 to 23.61 percentage points. In 9 countries, intent and uptake are similar, while in 24 countries, uptake is lower than intent, ranging from -5.30 to -69.20 percentage points. All European and American countries are in the first category, whereas 20 of the 21 African countries are in the third. There is no direct association between misinformation exposure and the variation between intent and uptake. Increases are seen in countries with high misinformation exposure, while sharp decreases occur in countries with minimal exposure. COVID-19 misinformation does not seem to significantly impact vaccine uptake. Although misinformation may have influenced some people against vaccination, this was outweighed by those persuaded by accurate information. The primary determinant of vaccine uptake is the individual’s assessment of their COVID-19 risk. People in European and American countries generally perceived this risk as high, in contrast to many in Africa, who deemed it low or nonexistent.

In 2021, I traveled to six West African countries to conduct a study on COVID-19 perceptions and lead training sessions on public awareness. COVID-19 vaccination, which began in March or April depending on the country, was a clear failure—very few people were showing up to get vaccinated. Since February 2020, the WHO had been repeating that an “infodemic” of false information about COVID-19 was “just as dangerous” as the pandemic itself, in the words of its Director-General. This infodemic was often said to explain the low vaccine uptake.

However, the discussions I had and the interviews I conducted did not suggest that people were particularly distrustful of COVID-19 vaccines. A large portion of the population didn’t see themselves at risk from COVID-19. Many believed it was a “white people’s disease” and thought Africans were protected either by the climate or by some kind of natural immunity. Misinformation about vaccines didn’t seem to play a role in the low uptake, even though African countries had the lowest vaccination coverage in the world.

In 2023, I conducted a study on COVID-19 vaccination in Niger, where only 22% of the population was vaccinated. The study confirmed my previous observations (https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.23-0708). A high 73.3% of the population believed that COVID-19 vaccines were “a good thing,” and 83% of those who had heard vaccine promotion messages supported them. This clearly showed that, at least in Niger, low vaccine uptake wasn’t due to mistrust of vaccines.

Since 2021, it had also become clear that the alarmist narratives and articles from 2020 predicting that a wave of misinformation would prevent adequate vaccine coverage had been wrong. In industrialized countries, people rushed to get vaccinated as soon as the vaccines became available. The pessimistic forecasts proved completely off base.

That led me to compare the intention to get vaccinated expressed in 2020 with actual uptake, and to evaluate whether exposure to false information had influenced the gap between intent and uptake. In other words, to see if misinformation had dissuaded some people from getting vaccinated. The results of this study, conducted in 46 countries and published in Discover Public Health, were unequivocal: there is no connection between exposure to misinformation online or on social media and the difference between stated vaccination intentions and actual uptake.

The internet and social media carry far more accurate health information than false information. Studies have shown that, contrary to popular belief, this is even more true for COVID-19 than for other health topics. You’d have to hold the public in pretty low regard to believe they’re more influenced by false information than by accurate information.

Please sign in or register for FREE

If you are a registered user on Research Communities by Springer Nature, please sign in

Follow the Topic

Health Communication
Humanities and Social Sciences > Media and Communication > Science Communication > Health Communication
COVID19
Life Sciences > Health Sciences > Clinical Medicine > Diseases > Infectious Diseases > COVID19

Related Collections

With Collections, you can get published faster and increase your visibility.

Antimicrobial Resistance: The New Challenge to Global Health in a Post-Pandemic World

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a seriously ongoing threat to global health, occurring when bacteria, fungi, viruses, and parasites evolve to resist the drugs designed to kill or block them. The COVID-19 pandemic has both directly and indirectly exacerbated the problem of AMR, as the overuse of antibiotics has accelerated the development of resistance in many pathogens. COVID-19 may have subsided, but AMR continues to pose a significant risk to the effectiveness of global healthcare systems, threatening to reverse decades of progress in combating infectious diseases. The interplay between population health and AMR has become increasingly critical as healthcare practices have shifted in response to the pandemic. Understanding this relationship is essential for developing effective strategies to mitigate the impact of AMR on population health in a post-COVID context.

The motivation for launching this Collection arises from the urgent need to address the rising tide of AMR as healthcare systems grapple with the long-term effects of the pandemic. Increased antibiotic use during COVID-19 treatment, changes in healthcare access, and disruptions in public health interventions have all contributed to an environment where AMR can thrive. Moreover, the pandemic has highlighted the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to tackling AMR, involving epidemiology, policymaking, and community health initiatives. This Collection aims to provide a platform for researchers and practitioners to share insights and findings that can inform future strategies to combat AMR while considering the broader implications for population health.

This Collection aims to highlight the multifaceted nature of AMR in a post-pandemic environment. We solicit articles that investigate the particular issues provided by the pandemic in terms of AMR development and containment, examine the impact of AMR on many sectors of healthcare, and propose novel strategies to minimize resistance propagation. Submissions may include original research, policy assessments, program evaluations, and comments on the following major areas:

• Epidemiology and trends of AMR post-pandemic

• Impact of COVID-19 on antibiotic usage

• Surveillance strategies for AMR

• AMR and stewardship

• Prevention and control measures to limit AMR spread

• Policies and programs to promote antibiotic stewardship

• Economic and social implications of AMR

• Global collaboration and initiatives to tackle AMR

By addressing these critical issues, this Collection aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the emerging challenges in antimicrobial resistance in a post-pandemic world and to promote effective strategies to preserve the power of our current antimicrobials.

Keywords: antimicrobial resistance; COVID-19; antibiotics; global health; infectious diseases; public health; policy; prevention

This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3.

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: Jun 30, 2026

From Public Health Policy to Community Practice: Navigating Systemic Challenges in the Health System

Health is shaped by a wide range of interconnected factors, making it a complex and adaptive state that emerges from the interplay of biological, social, emotional, and meaning-making (semiotic) dimensions. As such, improving public health cannot be accomplished through isolated interventions targeting single structural issues or individual diseases. However, medicine and public health research and policies are too often considered through a reductionist, positivist and normative perspective, as epitomised by the influential “disease control” paradigm. This approach limits health to the absence of disease and intends to address the latter by specific “high-impact” or “cost-effective” interventions, neglecting the root causes of ill-health and the complex interplay between individual interventions and (health) systems. This collection invites contributions that demonstrate how systems and complexity thinking can inform and transform public health policy and practice.

The interplay between public health policy and community practice is essential in shaping health outcomes and addressing systemic challenges within health systems. Despite the formulation of comprehensive public health policies, translating these policies into effective community-level interventions often faces numerous obstacles, including resource limitations, bureaucratic inertia, and varying local contexts. Understanding the dynamics between policy intent and on-the-ground implementation is crucial for fostering health equity and improving population health. The ability to navigate these complexities is vital for public health professionals, policymakers, and community practitioners alike. We are particularly interested in articles that showcase practical applications of systems approaches to address real-world public health challenges. We especially encourage submissions from authors in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), highlighting efforts to strengthen healthcare systems in their specific contexts.

The purpose of this Collection is to explore the systemic challenges in public health and the strategies employed to overcome them in community settings. We invite contributions that examine case studies, innovative frameworks, and collaborative approaches that enhance policy implementation and address local health needs.

Keywords: public health, health policy, community health, health economics, social determinants of health, political determinants of health, commercial determinants of health, health system, systems thinking, complexity science

This Collection supports and amplifies research related to SDG 3.

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: May 31, 2026