Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Right-wing politics bad for your health? Separating speculation from science

Listen to GLP Science Facts & Fallacies on iTunes, Spotify, Podbean and YouTube Podcasts. Or add the RSS feed to your favorite podcast app. Join our GLP Daily Digest to get these stories and more delivered to your inbox.

Screen Shot at AM
Alex Jones: Right-wing conspiracy theorist stokes fear of GMOs, pesticides

Politics has infiltrated every facet of modern life, including medicine. And some Americans seem increasingly inclined to make important health decisions based on their ideological commitments rather than the best evidence. That’s the implication of a recent paper published in Nature Human Behaviour.

The study, based on the long-running Add Health cohort (born roughly between 1974–1983), found that in the late 2000s there was no meaningful difference in objective health biomarkers (e.g., blood pressure) between self-identified liberals and conservatives. By 2016–2018, however, conservatives (especially “very conservative”) had significantly worse biomarker profiles and comorbidity scores than liberals. This health gap translated into slightly higher mortality for conservatives—six additional deaths—particularly from internal/disease causes like heart disease and cancer.

By 2020–2022, “very conservative” individuals had roughly a 1.1–1.4 percentage point higher probability of internal-cause death than “very liberal” peers. About half the gap was explained by demographic and socioeconomic sorting, while the other half remained unexplained by standard factors. Survey data also showed conservatives reported lower trust in medical advice, lower medication adherence and greater reluctance to seek care. The COVID pandemic response, characterized by confusing, contradictory and often politicized guidance, very likely drove this declining trust in medicine among conservatives.

The authors concluded that political identity may be emerging as a social determinant of health as the public check their beliefs about medicine against their existing ideological filters. Although this idea isn’t implausible and the influence of politics on scientific discourse is undeniable, it remains to be seen whether that incendiary partisan sparring is fueling worse health outcomes for one side of the political spectrum at the population level.

Does being a conservative put you in harm’s way? Join Dr. Liza Lockwood and Cam English on this episode of Facts & Fallacies as they scrutinize the study’s results.

Dr. Liza Lockwood is a medical toxicologist and the medical affairs lead at Bayer Crop Science. Follow her on X @DrLizaMD

Cameron J. English is the executive vice president at the American Council on Science and Health. Follow him on X @camjenglish

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.