{"id":2483500,"date":"2026-09-03T09:23:34","date_gmt":"2026-09-03T09:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/prgn.com\/?p=2483500"},"modified":"2026-09-03T09:24:39","modified_gmt":"2026-09-03T09:24:39","slug":"why-health-communications-has-never-mattered-more","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prgn.com\/es_es\/prgn-presents-podcasts\/why-health-communications-has-never-mattered-more\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Health Communications Has Never Mattered More"},"content":{"rendered":"

We are living through an age of wealth when it comes to health information. That sounds like a good thing. And in many ways, it is.<\/p>\n

Patients are more informed, more curious and more empowered than ever before. People Google their symptoms before they see a doctor. They search Instagram, TikTok, Facebook groups and ChatGPT for answers. They compare experiences with other patients. They ask better questions. They challenge doctors more than ever before. They no longer wait passively for information to be handed down to them by someone in a white coat.<\/p>\n

But at that same empowerment comes with a very real risk. Because despite all this good information, there is a growing tidal wave of misinformation, half-truths, celebrity opinion, algorithm-driven noise and health advice that may be compelling, shareable but utterly wrong. In the latest episode\u00a0of the PRGN Presents podcast series<\/a>, I compare older generations who often still place great trust in doctors with younger Gen Z-ers<\/a> who may trust influencers over clinicians, while also pointing out the scale of health misinformation on platforms such as TikTok.<\/p>\n

That is why health communications matters. Not in an abstract, \u201cnice to have\u201d way.<\/p>\n

It matters because how we communicate about health can influence whether someone seeks help, understands their treatment options, gets vaccinated, spots a symptom, trusts a service, or feels able to make a decision that could change their life. It matters to societies across the world.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

At OVID Health<\/a>, we often talk about communications as storytelling. But in healthcare, storytelling has to carry more weight than in almost any other sector. It has to be accurate, ethical, emotionally resonant and credible. It has to work for patients, carers, clinicians, policymakers and the public. And it has to meet people where they actually are, not where we would prefer them to be.<\/p>\n

One of the biggest mistakes in health communications is assumption. We assume we know what patients want. We assume convenience will always win. We assume a particular channel is right because it is fashionable. We assume the decision-maker is the obvious patient in front of us. But very often, the truth is more interesting.<\/p>\n

In my podcast conversation<\/a>\u00a0I shared an example from prostate cancer, where a client initially assumed patients would prefer the convenience of taking a pill rather than travelling to hospital for an injection. Social media analysis showed the opposite. For that particular group, the value of face-to-face time with a consultant outweighed the inconvenience of a hospital visit. It also showed that partners, often wives or girlfriends, played a significant role in treatment conversations.<\/p>\n

That is the kind of insight that changes a campaign. Suddenly the question is not simply, \u201cHow do we reach men aged 65 to 85?\u201d It becomes, \u201cWho do they trust? Who helps them make decisions? Where are those conversations really happening? And what do people need emotionally as well as practically?\u201d<\/p>\n

Channels matter. But messengers matter more. Sometimes a celebrity can create cut-through in a month that might otherwise take a year (menopause campaigns in the UK are a great example of this). Sometimes a clinician with credibility on TikTok can reach a younger audience in a way a formal campaign never could. Sometimes the best spokesperson is not the most obvious one. The art is in knowing which combination of evidence, emotion, channel and messenger will genuinely build trust.<\/p>\n

This becomes even more important in areas such as vaccination, where policy, personal choice, community protection and misinformation collide. Hard facts and clinical evidence are essential, but they are rarely enough on their own. People need to understand not just what the evidence says, but why it matters to them, to their child, to their family, and to the people around them. In the interview, I talked about measles and the power of combining clinical evidence with a human story that explains why vaccination protects not only an individual child, but a wider community.<\/p>\n

The same principle applies globally.<\/p>\n

In public health, trust is never generic. It is cultural, local, social and often deeply personal.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Communities that distrust health information do not change their minds because a polished campaign tells them to. They need to feel understood. They need to hear from people who have credibility in their world. Sometimes the most effective communications are incremental, local and painstakingly tailored.<\/p>\n

Listen in to the podcast as we discuss by health communications at its best sits in that space between science and story, evidence and empathy, public policy and personal experience. It helps people make sense of complexity without oversimplifying it. It builds trust without pretending trust is easy. It respects patients enough to tell them the truth in a way they can use.<\/p>\n

If we get it right, the impact isn\u2019t just awareness, it\u2019s helping people make more informed decisions about their health. Sometimes it saves lives.<\/p>\n