Have RFK and MAHA really changed American views on vaccines?

Summary

---

More or Less (BBC Radio 4)

Episode: "Have RFK and MAHA really changed American views on vaccines?"
Date: April 25, 2026
Host: Charlotte MacDonald

---

Overview

This episode of More or Less examines whether recent shifts in US vaccine policy and rhetoric—particularly under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—have actually moved the needle on public confidence in vaccine safety. Prompted by a striking Politico headline claiming "More Americans Doubt Vaccine Safety than Trust It," Charlotte MacDonald and guest Dr. David Higgins critically analyze the poll that inspired the headline, break down what survey data actually says, and discuss the complexities of measuring attitudes toward vaccines.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Context: Vaccines in the US Policy and Public Debate

• Host Overview ([00:00–01:08]):
  • RFK Jr. is characterized as a vaccine skeptic reshaping US vaccine policy.
  • A judge blocked his proposal to cut recommended childhood vaccines.
  • Recent measles outbreaks have prompted questions about declining vaccine uptake.
  • Politico published a poll headline: “More Americans Doubt Vaccine Safety than Trust It.”

2. Do Polls Reflect a True Loss of Confidence?

• Poll Contrasts:

  • Reuters Ipsos Poll (Feb 2026): 84% say vaccines like MMR are safe for children.
  • Pew Poll (Nov 2025): 84% believe the benefits of MMR outweigh risks.
  • Both polls indicate only a slight, gradual decline, but no drastic loss of confidence.

  Quote ([02:15]):

  “We have not seen a drastic decline in confidence in vaccines. We have not fallen off a cliff of vaccine confidence.”
  — Dr. David Higgins

3. Analysis of the Politico Poll & its Questions

• Complex/Wide-Ranging Questions ([02:34–05:15]):

  • The headline is based on a single, multifaceted question asking about science clarity, debate, enforcement, and damage.
  • Respondents faced a binary choice between two bundled statements, making interpretation tricky.

  Politico's Key Survey Question ([02:41]):

  "Which of the following comes closest to your view?
  (1) The science on vaccines is clear and it is damaging to question it
  (2) The facts on vaccines are still up for debate and it’s damaging to enforce their uptake."

  • 39% chose (1); 46% chose (2). This is used to claim more doubt than trust.

  Critique of This Approach:

  “In this one question, there are four different beliefs about vaccines all bundled into a binary choice.”
  — Dr. Higgins ([03:21])

  • Dr. Higgins notes even as a vaccine advocate, he would struggle to pick because the question confounds distinct issues (e.g., scientific clarity, questioning, enforcement).

4. What are Respondents Really Thinking About?

• Ambiguity About Vaccine Types ([05:42–06:37]):

  • Are people pondering COVID-19 vaccines or classic childhood vaccines?
  • Attitudes differ sharply between COVID-19 vaccines and longstanding vaccines like MMR.

  Quote:

  “If in their mind they’re thinking about the COVID-19 vaccine, they may have very strong views...that are then appearing in the data to show shifting attitudes toward all vaccines.”
  — Dr. Higgins ([06:04])

5. A Clearer Survey Item?

• Politico's Direct Vaccine Safety Question ([06:53–07:06]):

  • 26%: Vaccine risks are overblown by skeptics.
  • 37%: Vaccine risks are rare; benefits far outweigh them.
  • Add both: 63% appear to trust vaccine safety.
  • 15%: Risks not as rare as experts claim.
  • 10%: Risks are significant and enforcement is dangerous.

• Interpretation Caution:

  “With that question, they made a similar mistake...asking about multiple different things.”
  — Dr. Higgins ([07:36])

6. The Headline Gets Revised

• Politico’s Response and Correction ([08:07–08:22]):
  • After being contacted, Politico changed the headline to “Many Americans express doubt about vaccines,” citing an “editing error.”
  • Host notes: “Let’s just hope all the people...who posted about it on social media got the memo.” ([08:22])

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Survey Complexity:

  “Even though I am a champion for vaccines...I would be somewhere in the middle of this question."
  — Dr. Higgins ([04:19])

• On Headline Changes:

  “Now says ‘Many Americans express doubt about vaccines, Politico poll finds’... I don’t think anyone can disagree with that.”
  — Charlotte MacDonald ([08:15])

---

Key Timestamps for Reference

| Segment | Description | Time | |---|---|---| | Intro & Context | Vaccine policy, recent outbreaks, Politico headline | 00:00–01:14 | | Surveys Overview | Review of relevant polls (Reuters, Pew) | 01:43–02:15 | | Deconstructing the Politico Poll | Weaknesses in survey question design | 02:34–05:15 | | Ambiguity Over Vaccine Types | COVID-19 vs. other vaccine attitudes | 05:42–06:37 | | Breakdown of Direct Safety Question | Another survey item, its issues | 06:53–07:53 | | Politico Corrects Headline | Response and correction | 08:07–08:22 |

---

Conclusions

• Bold headlines about vaccine hesitancy may not reflect true public opinion due to ambiguous or poorly-designed survey questions.
• Longer-term, multi-source polling still shows a majority of Americans trust vaccine safety, especially for diseases like measles.
• When interpreting survey data, clarity and specificity matter—both about what is being asked and which vaccines are in question.
• Media headlines can distort public perception if they rest on dubious data interpretation, but corrections may arrive after misinformation spreads.

---

Transcript

[A]

Hello and thanks for downloading the More Or Less podcast. We're the programme that looks at the numbers in the news, in life and in surveys. Yeah, often they're from surveys. I'm Charlotte MacDonald. Vaccine policy in the US is something of an ideological battleground. Health Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr is a vaccine sceptic and since taking office, he has attempted to remake U.S. vaccine policy. In March, a judge blocked his proposal to cut the number of jabs that are recommended for kids. At the same time, last year saw the worst measles outbreak in the US in decades. There were more than 2,000 cases last year and three people died. There have been more than 1,500 cases so far in 2026. There's a lot going on, so it's possible the public's views on vaccination are shifting. Then, on 14 April, a new poll published by online news site Politico added a big claim into the mix. Here's the article's headline.

[B]

More Americans Doubt Vaccine Safety than Trust It, Politico poll finds.

[A]

But is that what the survey actually found?

[C]

It's really important that anytime you see a poll or a survey data point that is an outlier that you pause and. And that's exactly what I did with this.

[A]

This is David Higgins, a paediatrician and public health assistant professor who writes a substack called Community Immunity.

[C]

I immediately thought, wow, that seems out of step with other recent surveys and polls.

[A]

David's not wrong. The idea that more Americans doubt vaccine safety than trust it would represent a sizable shift in US public opinion. For example, a Reuters Ipsos poll in February found that 84% of respondents said vaccines for diseases like measles, mumps and rubella are safe for children. A Pew poll from November found that 84% of Americans thought the benefits of the MMR jab outweighed the risks. A slight fall from 88% in 2023.

[C]

So we can say with confidence that we have not seen a drastic decline in in confidence in vaccines. We have not fallen off a cliff of vaccine confidence.

[A]

So what's going on with the Politico poll that found that more Americans doubt vaccine safety than trust it?

[C]

That statement comes from a specific question in this poll. And this question asked, which of the

[B]

following comes closest to your view? The science on vaccines is clear and it is damaging to question it or the facts on vaccines are still up for debate and it's damaging to enforce their uptake.

[A]

In the POLITICO poll, 39% of respondents indicated their view was closer to the first statement that the science on vaccines is clear and it is damaging to question it. 46% were closest to the second. The facts on vaccines are still up for debate and it is damaging to enforce their uptake. Hence the headline that more Americans doubt vaccine safety than trust it. But David is not convinced.

[C]

I read this question and I thought, this question is very difficult to interpret. Now, here's the problem. In this question, a survey respondent is not being asked about one thing. They are not being asked simply about the safety of vaccines or their views on vaccines. They're being asked about four different things. One, is the science clear on vaccines? Two, is it damaging to question vaccine science? Three, are the facts on vaccines still up for debate? And four, is it damaging to enforce vaccine uptake? So in this one question, there are four different beliefs about vaccines all bundled into a binary choice.

[A]

I mean, questions one and three are pretty close, but you get the picture. These overlapping questions make it very hard to know exactly which part of the question is driving the answer.

[C]

I thought, how would I answer this question? And I had a hard time answering it myself. I believe the science on vaccines is clear, but I don't actually think it's damaging to question or debate the science of vaccines when done in good faith. In fact, that's a part of good science and good vaccine policymaking. And then the question also talks about whether it's damaging to enforce vaccine uptake. And my first thought is that if vaccine uptake is enforced in an overly harsh way, that actually can backfire and decrease uptake. So even though I am a champion for vaccines and I recommend vaccines every day to my patients in clinic, even then I would be somewhere in the middle of this question.

[A]

The point here is the article headline makes a specific claim about vaccine safety, seemingly on the basis of this question, but it's very hard to know which part of it is driving that response. Is it concerns about vaccine safety or. Or vaccine science or the enforcement of vaccine uptake or personal freedom? One more thing to consider in some of these questions. It's not clear which vaccines we're talking about.

[C]

We've known for several years that the attitudes toward COVID 19 vaccines are very different than some other vaccines, like, say, those for measles. And the challenge is when a person is asked about whether they think vaccines are safe, if in their mind they're thinking about the COVID 19 vaccine, they may have very strong views and may answer that question very differently than they would for other vaccines. So that makes it difficult sometimes to tell if shifting attitudes about vaccines are shifting attitudes toward all vaccines or shifting attitudes toward COVID 19 vaccines that are then appearing in the data to show shifting attitudes toward all vaccines,

[A]

Politico put a link to the full survey data in their article. The strange thing is that the survey also asked a question which seems to more directly test people's opinions on vaccine safety. Asked to pick one option, 26% of

[B]

respondents said vaccine risks are overblown by sceptics and contribute to dangerous vaccine hesitancy,

[A]

and 37% said vaccine risks are very

[B]

rare and the benefits of vaccination far outweigh them for most people.

[A]

If you categorize both groups as trusting vaccine safety, which isn't much of a Leap, it puts 63% of Americans in that group a clear majority. After this, 15% said vaccine risks are

[B]

not as rare as public health experts

[A]

claim, and just 10% of respondents took

[B]

this vaccine risks are significant and enforcing vaccines is dangerous.

[A]

Before we get too far ahead of ourselves, David isn't sure about this question either.

[C]

I worry that with that question they made a similar mistake. Right again, because you're asking about multiple different things.

[A]

These questions also have a lot of moving parts, and again, the actual vaccine involved is unclear, so it's hard to know what's driving the answers.

[C]

So I hesitate to use this data point to say that the headline question is inconsistent, although it sure does look like it challenges the interpretation.

[A]

We asked Politico whether they could justify the headline on their article and and a day later they changed.

[B]

Now says many Americans express doubt about vaccines, Politico poll finds I don't think

[A]

anyone can disagree with that. They added a note to the article saying the previous headline was an editing error. Let's just hope all the people who saw the headline and post about it on social media got the memo. Thanks to Dr. David Higgins, friend of the program. Mike Wendling sent us this story. If you've seen a number in the news you think we should take a look at, email more or [e-mail] until next week. Goodbye.