Have RFK and MAHA really changed American views on vaccines?

Summary

More or Less Podcast — Episode Summary

Episode Title: Have RFK and MAHA really changed American views on vaccines?
Host: Charlotte Macdonald (BBC Radio 4)
Date: April 25, 2026

---

Main Theme

This episode investigates recent claims that American attitudes toward vaccine safety have significantly shifted, purportedly due to changes in vaccine policy under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and public advocacy by groups such as MAHA. The host, Charlotte Macdonald, scrutinizes the numbers used in prominent headlines, particularly focusing on a recent Politico poll that made bold assertions about a dive in vaccine confidence.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Context: Vaccine Policy & Media Headlines

• The episode opens by referencing recent turmoil in US vaccine policy, mentioning Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s skepticism and policy proposals (01:40).
• 2025 witnessed the worst US measles outbreak in decades, with over 2,000 cases and three deaths (01:40).
• A Politico headline suggested: “More Americans Doubt vaccine safety than trust it, Politico poll finds” (02:48).

2. Scrutiny of the Headline & Survey

• Charlotte questions whether this alarming claim is supported by the underlying data (02:55).
• Dr. David Higgins, paediatrician and public health professor, highlights that the result appeared out of step with previous surveys:
  • Reuters/Ipsos (Feb 2026): 84% felt vaccines like MMR are safe for children.
  • Pew (Nov 2025): 84% of Americans said MMR benefits outweigh risks (03:24).

Notable Quote

"We can say with confidence that we have not seen a drastic decline in confidence in vaccines. We have not fallen off a cliff of vaccine confidence."
– Dr. David Higgins (03:56)

3. Dissecting the Politico Poll

• The controversial poll asked respondents to pick between:
  • “The science on vaccines is clear and it is damaging to question it.”
  • “The facts on vaccines are still up for debate and it's damaging to enforce their uptake.” (04:22)
• Results: 39% aligned with the first statement, 46% with the second—thus Politico's headline (04:34).
• Dr. Higgins critiques the question:
  • It combines four beliefs: clarity of vaccine science, damage of questioning it, whether facts are debatable, and harm of enforced uptake (05:02).
  • Respondents must bundle complex opinions into a binary answer.

Notable Quote

"In this one question, there are four different beliefs about vaccines, all bundled into a binary choice."
– Dr. David Higgins (05:02)

4. The Problem with Ambiguity

• Even vaccine advocates like Dr. Higgins would find the question confusing; he would land "somewhere in the middle" (06:00).
• It's unclear whether responses stem from trust in science, dislike of mandates, or a mix.

Notable Quote

"I believe the science on vaccines is clear, but I don't actually think it's damaging to question or debate the science… In fact, that's a part of good science and good vaccine policy making."
– Dr. David Higgins (06:00)

5. Unclear References to Which Vaccines

• Respondents might answer differently if they consider COVID-19 vs. long-standing vaccines, confounding results (07:23).

Notable Quote

"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."
– Dr. David Higgins (07:23)

6. Other Survey Results Contradict the Headline

• Other questions in the same survey point to continued trust in vaccine safety:
  • 26% said vaccine risks are overblown and drive hesitancy.
  • 37% said risks are rare and benefits outweigh them.
  • Combined, 63% are pro-safety—a "clear majority" (08:47).
  • Only 10% chose “Vaccine risks are significant and enforcing vaccines is dangerous.”

7. Survey Design Still Flawed

• Even seemingly better-framed questions are faulted for bundling issues—unclear which vaccine, what risk is referenced, and different policy attitudes (09:17).

Notable Quote

"Right again because you're asking about multiple different things."
– Dr. David Higgins (09:17)

8. Politico Retracts Its Headline

• Politico responded to BBC’s challenge by updating the headline:
  • Changed from “More Americans Doubt vaccine safety than trust it” to “Many Americans express doubt about vaccines” (09:56).
  • Noted this as an editing error.

Memorable Moment

"Let's just hope all the people who saw the headline and post about it on social media got the memo."
– Charlotte Macdonald (10:03)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• 01:40 — US vaccine policy changes and measles outbreak context
• 02:48 — The headline sparking controversy
• 03:24 — Past poll results contrasting Politico survey
• 04:22 — Problematic poll question and respondent choices
• 05:02–06:56 — Dr. Higgins critiques survey design and interpretation
• 07:23 — Difference between opinions on COVID-19 and other vaccines
• 08:18–09:33 — Supplementary poll questions and their interpretation
• 09:56 — Politico changes its headline

---

Conclusion

This episode delivers a sharp, sceptical look at how media presentation—and poorly designed poll questions—can misrepresent public opinion on hot-button issues like vaccine safety. The consensus is that American trust in vaccines has not experienced the seismic drop headlines suggest; rather, ambiguous questions and hasty editorial choices have muddied public perception.

---

Notable Quotes Recap

• "We have not fallen off a cliff of vaccine confidence." (Dr. David Higgins, 03:56)
• "In this one question, there are four different beliefs… all bundled into a binary choice." (Dr. David Higgins, 05:02)
• "Let's just hope all the people who saw the headline and post about it on social media got the memo." (Charlotte Macdonald, 10:03)

---

Tone: Analytical, clear-eyed, slightly wry—focused on careful scrutiny of evidence and media claims.
For further numbers in the news, listeners are encouraged to email the show.

Transcript

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the uk.

[LinkedIn Ads Advertiser]

Ever invest in something that seemed incredible at first but didn't live up to the hype? Like those $5 roses at a gas station? Or a secondhand piece of technology that breaks in the first 10 minutes? Marketers know that feeling. We optimize for the numbers that look great, impressions reach and reacts. But when they don't show revenue, well, that's a not so great conversation with the CFO. LinkedIn has a word for bullspend. Now you can invest in what looks good to your CFO. LinkedIn ads generates the highest ROAS of all major ad networks. You'll reach the right buyers because you can target by company, industry, job title and more. So cut the bull. Spend. Advertise on LinkedIn, the network that works for you. Spend $250 on your first campaign on LinkedIn ads and get a 250 credit for the next one. Just go to LinkedIn.com Broadcast. That's LinkedIn.com Broadcast. Terms and conditions apply.

[Whole Foods Market Advertiser]

Make Mother's Day even more special at Whole Foods Market. Kick off brunch or dinner with quality cheese and charcuterie with no synthetic nitrates. Then go seafood. There's an abundance on sale at Whole Foods Market, where it's all sustainable, wild caught responsibly farmed at the bakery. Grab seasonal treats like their strawberry pretzel cream pie and you can't go wrong with a ready to heat quiche Lorraine, deviled eggs and fresh cut fruits to go celebrate mom with Whole Foods Market.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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 skeptic 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.

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

More Americans Doubt vaccine safety than trust it, Politico poll finds.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

But is that what the survey actually found?

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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.

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

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.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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.

[Dr. David Higgins]

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.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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.

[Dr. David Higgins]

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 policy making. 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.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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 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.

[Dr. David Higgins]

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,

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

And 37% said vaccine risks are very

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

not as rare as public health experts

[Charlotte Macdonald]

claim, and just 10% of respondents took

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

this option vaccine risks are significant and enforcing vaccines is dangerous.

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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.

[Dr. David Higgins]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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

[Narrator/Ad Announcer]

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

[Charlotte Macdonald]

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 programme 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 lessbc.co.uk until next week. Goodbye.

[Grainger Advertiser]

If you work in university maintenance, Grainger considers you an MVP because your playbook ensures your arena is always ready for tip off. And Grainger is your trusted partner, offering the products you need all in one place, from H Vac and plumbing supplies to lighting and more. And all delivered with plenty of time left on the clock so your team always gets the win. Call 1-800-GRAINGER visit grainger.com or just stop by Grainger for the ones who get it done.

[Whole Foods Market Advertiser]

Discover Top Rated Stays Loved by guests

[Charlotte Macdonald]

Rated highest by real guests through authentic reviews VRBO Book a vacation rental Loved by guests.