Words Matter: A Guide to Patient-Centered Language Around Medical Misinformation

Medical misinformation in the United States is at an all-time high. The rise of social media, the erosion of trust in institutions, and the overwhelming volume of health content available online create a perfect storm. Cancer patients are among the most vulnerable to misinformation, facing a diagnosis that is frightening, complex, and deeply personal. In their search for hope, control, and answers, many turn to the internet. For pharmacists and other clinicians, understanding how misinformation spreads, why patients are drawn to it, and how to address it with empathy and evidence is no longer optional.

What is Health Misinformation?

Health misinformation is information about health that is false, inaccurate, or misleading according to the best available evidence at the time. These claims are often not grounded in clinical evidence and may ignore the complexities of cancer biology and treatment, leaving out key facts or distorting them entirely.

In oncology, misinformation tends to take several recognizable forms. It may involve overstating the benefits of unproven therapies—such as ivermectin or fenbendazole—as cancer treatments or making claims like “there is a cure for cancer,” “sugar feeds cancer,” or “deodorant causes breast cancer.” It may involve ignoring or outright denying the known risks and toxicities associated with these agents. Perhaps most concerning, it can lead patients to skip or delay standard, evidence-based cancer treatment in favor of alternative products that lack meaningful clinical evidence.

What makes this especially challenging is the environment in which patients and caregivers are navigating their diagnoses. Approximately 84% of the U.S. public has sought cancer or health information on the internet, and 86% are actively engaged with social media. This means patients, their families, and even clinicians are all exposed to the same online ecosystem, one where a compelling anecdote can travel farther and faster than a peer-reviewed clinical trial.

“So, we know our patients are using this; their families are using it, and so are we, to be quite honest,” explained Christy Harris, PharmD, BCOP, FHOPA, associate professor at the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy & Health Sciences in Boston, and a clinical pharmacist at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.

Why Social Media?

Social media plays a huge role in the spread of medical misinformation and growing interest in alternative cancer therapies. These platforms create what's called an echo chamber effect where misinformation spreads fast, confirmation bias takes over, and patients end up finding anecdotal stories that feel more compelling than clinical evidence. In fact, about one-third of cancer treatment content on social media contains misinformation. For a patient who just received a cancer diagnosis and is desperate for answers, that's a really dangerous environment.

So why do patients turn to social media for cancer information? Much of it has to do with agency. Upon a cancer diagnosis, a patient’s entire world shifts. They are faced with disruptions to their family, work, and social lives. They are overwhelmed by feelings of uncertainty, fear, anxiety, depression, and a lack of control.

Despite the real benefit of providing appropriate evidence-based information—which can improve sense of control and quality of life, lower anxiety and depression, improve treatment adherence, and support realistic expectations and self-care—many patients feel this is an unmet need, so they “look it up themselves.” A majority search for information before the first visit, with up to 80% relying on at least 1 non-validated source, such as those from social media, blogs, magazines, or non-government or -hospital sites. Patients may even come to an appointment armed with personal anecdotes from friends or family.

How Can Pharmacists Effectively Counsel Patients?

The core of approaching patients armed with health misinformation is listening and communicating evidence-based information with empathy, being empathetic and evidence-based, and preserving trust. Pharmacists must recognize that patients are scared, uncertain, and may be seeking agency, not just a pill.

“They're not looking for ivermectin. They're looking for agency,” said Rachel Feaster, PharmD, BCOP, BCPS, clinical oncology pharmacist and integrative medicine pharmacist at the Fred Hutch Cancer Center, quoting the title of a LinkedIn article written by Douglas Flora, MD, LSSBB, oncologist and the president-elect for The Association of Cancer Care Centers.

The first step in addressing misinformation is simply acknowledging that it is common. Patients are not outliers for encountering false or misleading health claims online; rather, they are the norm. With the vast majority of the public seeking health information on the internet and engaging with social media, exposure to misinformation is nearly unavoidable, particularly for patients navigating a cancer diagnosis who are actively searching for answers and hope.

What may be surprising is how underprepared many clinicians feel to address it. Only about 18% of providers report receiving any formal training in how to talk with patients about medical misinformation. This is not a reflection of clinical competence but a gap in education around a relatively new and rapidly evolving challenge. Social media and non-validated sources are everywhere, and patients will continue to encounter them regardless of what happens in the clinic.

The goal of these conversations should never be to shame or dismiss a patient for what they've read or believed. Instead, the aim is to meet patients where they are, understand what they've found and why it resonated with them, and help them navigate toward accurate, evidence-based information. The good news is that this doesn't require an entirely new skill set. The patient-centered communication skills clinicians already use every day—including active listening, empathy, open-ended questioning, and shared decision-making—are exactly the tools needed to have these conversations effectively.

Step 1: Understand the Patient's Information and Motives

Before offering any correction or education, take time to understand what the patient has actually read, heard, or believes and why it resonated with them. Ask open-ended questions that invite dialogue rather than debate, and they give critical insight into the patient's underlying concerns and motivations. It's also okay to be honest about the limits of your own familiarity with a particular source or study. This signals openness and builds trust rather than putting the patient on the defensive.

Step 2: Educate and Correct the Misinformation

Once you understand what the patient believes, begin to gently and clearly address the evidence. Tailor your explanation to the patient's level of health literacy, and focus on helping them understand the difference between types of evidence. From there, pharmacists can describe what strong evidence actually looks like and the difference between trial design such as in vitro and animal studies versus randomized clinical trials.

When explaining risks, be concrete and specific because vague warnings are easy to dismiss, but clear examples are harder to ignore. And rather than reaching for dismissive language that can shut the conversation down entirely, pair every correction with an explanation. This approach keeps the patient engaged, preserves the relationship, and makes it far more likely that your message will actually land.

Step 3: Advise on Future Online Searches and Resources

Patients will keep looking online after they leave your office, and the goal isn't to tell patients not to search; it's to help them search more safely and critically. Pharmacists can direct them toward reliable resources such as NCCN patient guidelines, major cancer center patient pages, and government or hospital-based websites. And leave the door open: "If you come across a new study or social media post that you're unsure about, bring it in and we can go through it together." This reframes your role from gatekeeper to guide.

Step 4: Preserve and Strengthen the Relationship

Throughout the conversation make sure the patient feels heard, respected, and valued. Reinforce the collaborative nature of the relationship and respect for patient autonomy: "Ultimately, it's your body and your decision. My role is to give you the best evidence I can and help you weigh the risks and benefits.

Avoid confrontational or shaming language at all costs. The ultimate goal is for patients to feel safe disclosing what they are taking or considering, rather than hiding it out of fear of judgment.

What Comes Next?

Medical misinformation is not going away, and the challenge will only grow as social media continues to evolve and patients become increasingly engaged in their own care. The role of the pharmacist is not to shut that curiosity down, but to channel it. By approaching these conversations with empathy, patience, and a commitment to evidence-based care, pharmacists are uniquely positioned to be the trusted voice that cuts through the noise.

REFERENCES

Harris C, Feaster R. Controversial therapies in oncology: Evidence, ethics and effective communications surrounding ivermectin, fenbendazole, and mebendazole. Presented at: 2026 HOPA Annual Meeting. March 25-27, 2026. New Orleans, LA.