Fake news is the deliberate presentation of false or misleading claims as news.

Such content can distort perceptions, foster confusion, and even promote detrimental behaviors.

Media literacy, transparent communication, and promoting trustworthy sources are needed to address this issue.

In recent years, the spread of fake news—particularly in the health domain—has become a significant concern. Misinformation about medical treatments, vaccines, and diseases often circulates rapidly on social media and other online platforms, sometimes outpacing factual information. The proportion of health-related misinformation on social media ranged from 0.2% to 28.8%[1]. This can lead people to develop false beliefs about health risks, remedies, and preventive measures, which may influence their decisions in ways that are detrimental to their well-being.

Gelfert (2018)[2] defines fake news as the deliberate presentation of false or misleading claims as news, which are misleading by design. This definition suggests that the information is knowingly false or misleading. The content, sources, and channels are structured to deceive, rather than just being accidental misinformation. Fake news in the context of health refers to the deliberate dissemination of false or misleading information, typically presented as legitimate reporting, that can have a profound effect on how the public understands health-related topics. This kind of misinformation includes rumors, conspiracy theories, pseudoscientific claims, and manipulated data about diseases, medical treatments, vaccines, and public health policies. Such content can distort perceptions, foster confusion, and even promote behaviors that are detrimental to individual and community well-being.

Social media platforms, blogs, and unregulated websites are common sources where fake health news proliferates, enabling rapid and widespread sharing of unverified or inaccurate information. Because these channels often lack rigorous oversight or fact-checking, misleading stories can quickly gain traction and be accepted as truth by large audiences.

The impact of fake health news on beliefs and decision-making

The impact of fake health news on beliefs and expectations is significant. Exposure to false information can actively shape what people believe about health behaviors, treatments, and policies. This influence sometimes leads to skepticism or outright resistance toward proven medical advice and can undermine trust in reputable health authorities. As a result, public health initiatives may be hindered, and the effectiveness of responses to health crises can be compromised. The impact of fake news on people’s health beliefs is profound. Exposure to misleading or false information can lead individuals to distrust credible health sources, reject proven medical advice, or adopt harmful practices. For example, fake news about vaccine safety has contributed to vaccine hesitancy, resulting in lower immunization rates and outbreaks of preventable diseases. Additionally, during health crises, such as pandemics, the rapid circulation of fake news can create confusion, increase anxiety, and undermine public health efforts.

Fake health news has significantly influenced public beliefs and individual decision-making, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Misinformation about the virus, its transmission, and potential treatments spread rapidly through social media and other online platforms. This led many people to adopt false beliefs, such as the effectiveness of unproven remedies or the dangers of vaccines, which in turn shaped their health behaviors.

For example, during the early stages of the pandemic, false claims that drinking hot water or taking certain supplements could prevent COVID-19 circulated widely. As a result, some individuals neglected proven preventive measures like mask-wearing and social distancing, increasing their risk of infection. Additionally, widespread vaccine misinformation contributed to vaccine hesitancy, undermining efforts to achieve people immunity.

Fake news can also significantly impact adherence to psychotherapy by spreading misinformation about mental health treatments and the effectiveness of therapy. When individuals encounter false claims—such as therapy being ineffective, harmful, or unnecessary—they may develop doubts about the value of attending sessions or following their therapist's recommendations. This mistrust can result in missed appointments, reluctance to engage fully in the therapeutic process, or even premature discontinuation of treatment. Furthermore, fake news may promote stigma or alternative, unproven treatments, further discouraging individuals from seeking or continuing evidence-based psychotherapy.

The philosopher Michel Foucault argued that "truth isn't outside power"[3]. Fake news demonstrates this, as those in power create "truths" that serve their interests. Foucault developed the concept of “regimes of truth” that could be referred to social media algorithms which create echo chambers where information is validated not by objective evidence but by its circulation and reinforcement.

The rapid spread of fake news online—especially through social media—makes it difficult for people to distinguish between credible and unreliable sources. As a result, public trust in health authorities can be undermined, and misinformation may shape collective attitudes toward critical health interventions. Addressing this challenge requires efforts in media literacy, transparent communication, and promoting trustworthy sources to help people make informed decisions regarding their health.

Borges do Nascimento, I. J., Pizarro, A. B., Almeida, J. M., Azzopardi-Muscat, N., Gonçalves, M. A., Björklund, M., & Novillo-Ortiz, D. (2022). Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 100(9), 544–561.

Gelfert, A. (2018). "Fake News: A Definition." Informal Logic, 38(1), 84–117.

Foucault, M. (1980a). Truth and Power. In C. Gordon (Ed.), Michel Foucault—Power/ Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 (pp. 109-133).

© Psychology Today