Two years ago, I wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that one of the greatest threats to childhood vaccination is the normalization of skepticism, even though it isn’t actually the norm. When credible outlets, trusted voices, and social media algorithms tell the public that most Americans doubt vaccines, some may start to wonder if they should, too. I watched that play out this week.
On Monday, Politico published a poll on vaccine attitudes titled, “More Americans doubt vaccine safety than trust it, Politico Poll finds,” followed by the subhead, “Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s views are commonplace across the land.” I consider Politico a reputable news outlet, so this headline stopped me in my tracks.
Within hours, other credible outlets ran headlines such as “Vaccine skepticism now the norm for many Americans.” I saw similar messages spread across social media and heard from others in my professional networks. Most notably, The Defender – the media outlet of Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine organization formerly led by Kennedy himself – ran the headline “Vaccine Skepticism in U.S. Is Widespread, Politico Poll Reveals.” A physician quoted in the piece claimed the findings showed that nearly half the country is “unsure about vaccine safety.” A Health and Human Services spokesperson added, “This survey makes it clear that Secretary Kennedy’s priorities resonate across party lines.”
That’s a big claim. As I have written before, these statements are not supported by the weight of evidence. Yes, as epidemiologist Katelyn Jetelina pointed out in an interview for the Politico piece, there is a large, movable middle, and it deserves serious attention from clinicians and communicators.
But does this poll support the idea that Kennedy’s views are now commonplace and vaccine skepticism is widespread?
Absolutely not. A close reading of the poll data tells a different story.
To understand why, we need to look carefully at the specific survey question driving these headlines. In its article, Politico said, “Nearly half of U.S. adults surveyed last month signaled they think the science on vaccines remains up for debate and that it’s damaging to require people to receive them.” Other outlets ran with similar interpretations.
Here is the actual question from the poll:
“Which of the following comes closest to your view?: The science on vaccines is clear and it is damaging to question it | The facts on vaccines are still up for debate and it is damaging to enforce their uptake”
Read that question carefully and answer it honestly.
Did you notice the problem? You weren’t asked about one thing; you were asked about four different things simultaneously.
– Is the science on vaccines clear? – Is it damaging to question vaccine science? – Are the facts on vaccines still up for debate? – Is it damaging to enforce vaccine uptake?
These are separate and independent beliefs all bundled into a binary choice. Survey methodologists call this approach a “double-barreled question.” This question has four barrels.
Think about how people might answer this.
– A pediatrician who believes the science is clear but also that vigorous debate is essential to good science. Where do they land? – A parent who thinks the evidence is clear and has vaccinated their children but believes that “enforcing uptake” is government overreach, agrees with half of both options. – A hesitant parent who has real questions about the childhood schedule, but still brings their kids in for every appointment and supports school vaccine requirements as a reasonable community protection, has nowhere to go, either.
The survey question cannot distinguish these people. As a result, it is difficult to interpret and a misinterpretation to claim that half the country is now skeptical of vaccines.
To make this clear, let me explain how I would have responded. I believe the science on vaccines is clear, but I don’t think it is damaging to debate or question it when done in good faith. In fact, I believe it can be damaging not to debate or ask questions; that is what good scientists do. And is it “damaging to enforce vaccine uptake”? That depends on how it is enforced. Evidence shows that overly harsh enforcement can backfire on the ultimate goal of improving uptake. That would place me somewhere in the middle as well.
There are several findings worth considering carefully.
– When asked what best describes their view, only 10% of respondents chose the most skeptical position that “vaccine risks are significant, and enforcing vaccines is dangerous.” I hesitate to cite this finding, as the answer choice combines two different concepts – risk and enforcement – but even then, this seems inconsistent with the headline finding above. – When asked if they support reducing the number of vaccines Americans receive, 40% of respondents supported this. This question has a similar framing problem. Nobody in the United States is forced to receive a vaccine, and the actual policy debate is about recommendations, not what Americans are compelled to accept. The wording subtly implies that vaccines are currently happening to people rather than being chosen. Even so, 40% is real and reflects something the medical and public health community needs to take seriously. – When asked whether reducing vaccines is a core principle of the Make America Healthy Again movement, only 34% said yes. Even for people who identified with MAHA, vaccines don’t seem to be the animating issue. That challenges the idea that RFK Jr.’s views are commonplace across the land.
This poll should not be interpreted in isolation. Multiple surveys and research from the last several years show a slow erosion in confidence but remarkably resilient support for vaccines. A Reuters/Ipsos survey conducted in February found that 84% of Americans, including 81% of Republicans, said vaccines like the measles, mumps, and rubella shot are safe for children. Seventy-four percent said the government should require children to be vaccinated to attend school. A February poll from the Partnership to Fight Infectious Disease found that 89% of Americans – including 82% of Republicans – said vaccines are essential for public health.
Notably, Republican pollsters Tony Fabrizio and Bob Ward, in a memo to the White House in late 2025, found strong bipartisan majorities supporting vaccines like MMR, Tdap, and hepatitis B – including more than three-quarters of Trump voters – and warned that efforts to limit vaccine access could backfire politically.
While there are genuine warning signs of eroding trust and confidence that deserve acknowledgment, the weight of the evidence says vaccine support remains the norm. But that reality is not immune to the stories we tell about it.
I understand more than most that Americans’ feelings about vaccines are incredibly messy. I appreciate that polls such as this one attempt to tease out the nuance. And they are often all we have since research on vaccine delivery has been cut and remains chronically underfunded.
But how this type of information is gathered and interpreted has significant consequences on people’s beliefs and attitudes, and mistakenly misframing vaccine skepticism as more widespread than it is can cause harm. It may change what clinicians say in the exam room, the decisions policymakers and leaders make, and ultimately become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If enough people hear a misleading message that most of their neighbors are skeptical about vaccines, some will start to doubt, too.
Unfortunately, this week’s poll became the raw material for that normalization. I believe this poll was conducted and reported in good faith, but it does not show that Kennedy’s views on vaccines are now mainstream or that most Americans no longer trust vaccines.
I wish the headlines didn’t matter. But for people who see them, that is not the case. Parents and patients making decisions need accurate information about where their neighbors and our communities actually stand together, not a distorted picture that makes skepticism feel more normal than it is. The least clinicians, health professionals, and communicators can do are make sure the message we’re sending them is accurate because this norm is worth defending.
David Higgins, M.D., M.P.H., is a practicing pediatrician and public health physician whose work focuses on vaccine delivery, health policy, and communication. He writes the newsletter Community Immunity, where this essay first appeared.
