>> Listen to the episode on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and others.
TRANSCRIPT:
DOUG: This year marks the 25th year of the Edelman Trust Barometer, but it’s also the fifth anniversary of the trust and health portion of that report. One of the people who’s the driving force behind it is joining me. Saramaya, what was one of the things that surprised you the most about the report?
SARAMAYA: Thanks, Doug, for having me. This year’s fifth annual Trust and Health Special Report from Edelman, we immediately were very surprised at one of the key findings, which was that 70% globally among our 16 countries and 16,000 respondents that 70% found at least one device of health claim to be true. This showed us that the divisiveness in health beliefs is not among the fringe population or fringe groups that many of us may often think or feel, and that it is actually very pervasive. And that was quite startling to us. And we saw that among age, we saw that among gender, and we saw that among education level as well for university or non-university.
DOUG: So, just to clarify for the audience, because I’m a believer that vaccines are a good thing, you didn’t consider that a divisive belief. It’s more of those who are on the other side of the more recent types of controversies. Can you talk a little bit about some of those subjects, examples of what you considered a divisive belief?
SARAMAYA: Absolutely. Our report really didn’t attempt to state whether popular claims or unpopular claims from a healthcare perspective were true or not, but what we really looked at was where the divisiveness perspective may exist on a spectrum. And so, some of those examples included if animal protein is healthier than plant-based protein or if childhood vaccinations are helpful or harmful, we looked at if acetaminophen during pregnancy would lead to autism or not. And so really looked across the 16 countries of where those perspectives are. And again, not trying to say you’re right, you’re wrong, you’re confused, or you’re confident, but really just assessing. And we saw that at least 70% believed in at least two or more of the six health claims that we assessed.
DOUG: I assume if you believe in stuff that would be highly questioned by seasoned medical experts, you might be less healthy in your life, but the people who did respond that they believed some of these newer claims, if you will describe themselves as healthy or pretty healthy compared to the other population. What’s behind that?
SARAMAYA: This year in particular, we saw over a ten point drop compared to the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer Special Report: Trust and Health in confidence to make health decisions. So, the confidence to make a decision plummeted and continues to decline. Even if you feel healthy or characterize yourself as healthy and engaged in your health, you’re very at a loss of how to make those decisions. And so, we are seeing that the trust in various different groups, they’re listening to a lot of voices, whether they believe in two or more of the divisive claims or not, but especially that audience, that 70%. And so, they’re trusting a lot of different voices. They’re searching actively through AI, traditional search, social, friends and family, and their healthcare provider who is actually most trusted among all of those groups. They’re reading different types of news sources. They’re very educated and active in information, but what that is causing is information overload and huge abundance of content. And so, where that’s leaning is they’re not sure what to believe or what not. And it’s leaning towards this divisiveness of I’m not sure how to make a health decision, but I’m still feeling good, seeking out that information, finding these voices, and that there’s just widespread confusion that continues to happen. And it is even among any group, regardless of age, demographic, or education level.
DOUG: Yeah. So, if we put aside the possible societal impact of all of that for PR people, it would probably be a pretty good opportunity, because there’s a real need for those who are in the space to get that accurate information out and get their messages out. So, how do you approach it in this divisive environment of conflicting ideas about things that previously were accepted?
SARAMAYA: Great question Doug. I think there’s been so much shift in getting the story out to now opening up a conversation. And now for healthcare communicators in particular, and for providers, different types of community leaders, policymakers, and any of these voices, media included, it cannot be here’s what you should do. Here are the facts. Let me make it clear to you, audience. It has to be a conversation. It has to be guiding decision, not telling me what to decide. As soon as you tell me what to decide, I’m not listening. You know, it’s like a classic teenager, right? Don’t tell me what to do. I’m going to do the opposite.
DOUG: While you rip into teenagers. I think there might be people of all ages who show some of those same traits. Let’s not go after the teenagers on this one, but I would like to turn to another topic that’s affecting healthcare and actually phrase it in a way similar to the way you did the survey, instead of what about the horrors of AI? AI is a good thing. It’s a not good thing. It’s getting right information to people quicker. It might also be getting wrong information to them quicker, but we’re not passing judgment on what people believe. So, knowing that AI is out there, how important is it for organizations and their PR programs to be looking to be showing up in these large language models?
SARAMAYA: Yeah, I mean, we see that LLMs are going to contain an increasing amount of earned driven search, right? Earned driven content and GEO is going to it’s already changing what we’re seeing, experiencing, and counseling in our 2026 Trust and Health Special Report, we saw over 64% believe that fluent AI users, self-defined as fluency, believe that they can perform a basic medical procedure as well as a doctor, which is pretty alarming. I would not want someone doing a quick ChatGPT of how to give me stitches, an incision, or any other type of basic procedure, but the reason that there is such an alarming confidence in that is because of the access of information, and that when I turned to AI, it’s non-judgmental, it’s easy to understand. It’s giving me a follow up, a type of dialogue in that way. And so, as we continue to think about channel evolution and where AI comes into play for public relations professionals, we have to think about the audience even more, right? And that what they can use is easy to understand. It’s having a dialogue. Last year’s report, we saw an abundance of empathy really rise to audience demand. And now it’s not just empathy. It’s guiding with the nonjudgmental conversation, the guiding to decision, rather than just telling me what to do.
DOUG: It’s so interesting that doctors were the most trusted group. Even with all this divisiveness and doctors saying one thing, that you’ve got 70% of the people disagreeing with it. What’s the role of both utilizing doctors and communications and sort of all the changes that have so many doctors overwhelmed where they can’t really spend the time with the patients? How is that playing into the way you’re advising and counseling clients?
SARAMAYA: I felt a bit of relief when we saw that doctors were still the most trusted, because it felt to me that scientific validation is still there as an undertone for patients and communities, but just because it’s most trusted, it’s not always the first to follow that advice, to listen and do exactly what the doctor said. Because patients are walking into the doctor’s office already very informed, because they’ve gone to all of these different types of channels, voices, AI, and in-person with friends and family. And so, while doctors are most trusted about health decisions, what to do? I think that it means that doctors have to be sure they’re not only showing up as a doctor. Take a page from the AI playbook. Be sure that you are showing the empathy that you’re showing, the easy to understand and the conversational and accessible type of demeanor with patients, but know that they’re still turning to you and they’re still looking at you. And so, I think between doctors, scientists and some of these voices, credentialed or non-credentialed because there’s also creators and different types of voices, it’s ensuring that we stay consistent in what the message is first and foremost. And that you’re not telling someone what to do, you’re really brokering the conversation.
DOUG: Yeah, that’s a fascinating shift. And thank you so much for putting this report together. Any final thoughts before we wrap up?
SARAMAYA: Every year some of the information can feel like a downer because the world is a bit chaotic. And I think where I found hope and motivation as a communicator this year was thinking about audiences feeling empowered and excited about healthcare. And even if it’s chaotic and that working together within communities over a shared outcome, a shared goal. We can all agree that we all want to have clean water. How we get there may be different how I view it or you view it or you know, some other group, but really coming together for shared outcomes and shared goals, I think, is what society can benefit a lot of right now. And so, our 2026 Trust and Health Special Report from Edelman gave me a newfound motivation in that as well.
DOUG: Clearly, healthcare consumers are engaged, and hopefully the PR audience will be engaged in the great stuff, you would say. Thanks so much for being with us.
SARAMAYA: Thanks Doug for having me.
