New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Americans trust vaccine researchers as much as other scientists, poll finds

Roughly seven in 10 people still trust vaccine researchers, a new poll finds. The number is in line with trust for other scientists

A woman on the right draws an injection into a needle as a man behind her observes on the left.

Then medical student Shamis Fallah (right) prepares a tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap) vaccination on August 11, 2010, in Vallejo, Calif.

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Americans trust vaccines scientists as much as they do other scientists, a new U.S. survey finds, despite a decline in vaccination rates and a proliferation of attacks on vaccines in both the wake of the COVID pandemic and the rise of figures such as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a noted vaccine skeptic.

The results come as the Trump administration is reportedly pivoting away from attacks on vaccines, following other polling that has found broad voter support for immunization.

Roughly seven in 10 people have “a moderate or greater amount” of trust that vaccine scientists act in the public interest, according to the new poll, which was conducted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC). The survey, which included 1,650 people, asked, “How much, if at all, do you trust scientists working on vaccines to act in the best interest of people like you?” and found that 69 percent of participants reported great or moderate trust. That matches statistical data on trust in medical researchers and scientists in general and is in line with past measures of trust in scientists.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“The public has an anchored awareness of the benefits of vaccination,” says APPC director Kathleen Hall Jamieson. That should be reassuring to public health experts who have voiced increasing concern that the U.S.’s decades of success in eliminating diseases such as polio and measles may have made the public unaware of vaccination’s benefits, she says.

At the same time, under Kennedy’s leadership, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has sought to limit vaccines, including several childhood shots. Meanwhile measles has broken out across the U.S., killing three people last year, while pertussis, or whooping cough, has been linked to at least 16 deaths last year.

“I don’t think the results of the survey are surprising; [Kennedy] does not represent the views of most people,” says vaccine expert Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “Most people get their children vaccinated because they want them to be safe, despite the loud voices.”

“We still have a lot of concerns” amid increasing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable disease, especially in communities with low inoculation rates, Offit says.

More broadly, there’s a “misperception” that trust in science has eroded specifically since the pandemic, Jamieson says. Science remains among the most trusted U.S. institutions, ranking with the military and firefighters for trust. Crucially, the new survey suggests scientists need to be more aware that some people think that science has unintended consequences and believe that scientists feel “superior” to others. Vaccine scientists scored slightly better on these accounts than other researchers, but the discipline overall should pay attention to this feedback, Jamieson says.

Editor’s Note (4/27/26): This story is in development and may be updated.

Dan Vergano was formerly senior editor, Washington, D.C., at Scientific American. He has previously written for Grid News, BuzzFeed News, National Geographic and USA Today. He is chair of the New Horizons committee for the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing and a journalism award judge for both the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

More by Dan Vergano

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe