Conspiracy theorists have been around for centuries. From the earth being flat to the fake moon landing, expert knowledge has always been questioned. But what happens when these theories are taken seriously? What happens when conspiracy theorists become our leaders? And how does this affect our trust in the institutions that are meant to protect us?
Earlier this month, Florida’s surgeon general Joseph Ladapo announced that the state would be moving to end vaccine mandates for children. A noted vaccine skeptic, Ladapo views the government’s role in our personal life as controlling and coercive as slavery, so he presents this legislation as actively empowering citizens to assert personal freedom and autonomy.
However, health experts predict severe negative impacts. A 2025 Stanford University study published in JAMA found that even moderate declines in childhood vaccination rates dramatically increase the frequency and size of outbreaks, even of previously eliminated diseases like measles.
Low-income families, for instance, will have less of an incentive to get their children vaccinated if it isn’t carried out by schools, especially as they already struggle with lack of transportation and access to healthcare facilities, so these families will be disproportionately affected by increased hospital visits, childcare costs and loss of wages.
While skepticism of mainstream intellectual knowledge isn’t new, the way in which anti-intellectualism manifests in American society today is. Ladapo is a trained doctor and someone the public expects would rely on science and adopt policies that are best for his citizens. His rejection of medical evidence is particularly damaging as it carries the weight of legitimacy.
Florida is not isolated in this though. The appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr, an unqualified vaccine skeptic, as Secretary of Health and Human Services reflects a broader shift from evidence-based leadership to ideology-based rule that disregards public safety.
RFK Jr, in this position validates conspiracy theories and legitimizes misinformation, representing the dissonance we are now seeing between medical evidence and political authority. Science says one thing and elected leaders say another, so how do we know who to trust?
While 81% of people in Florida still support vaccine mandates, vaccine hesitancy is on the rise because distrust is being fueled by government health officials. This contributes to a wider erosion of trust in our institutions. The implications of this could be that even when information from the government is true, the public will be reluctant to trust it as the credibility of institutions is now under review.
A rise in mistrust in our institutions and democratically elected leaders is a problem because it reduces social cohesion. If people don’t trust the government on matters of public health, they are less likely to trust them on anything at all.
This leads to a decrease in civic engagement as people feel disengaged and unheard. In essence, democracy cannot function without a politically engaged and informed public, so misinformation presents a serious threat to the foundations of democracy.
Conspiracy theorists were once a small subgroup of society, but now they hold office. The rise of anti-intellectualism is not only a threat to public health but to democracy itself.
The harm of misinformation therefore isn’t just that it is false. It is that when it comes from people that carry legitimate political authority, it has the ability to affect public life.
