Scrolling through social media, it’s easy to feel like health advice is everywhere. A creator shares a routine that “changed everything.” Another explains how they fixed their gut health. A clinician posts quick tips between patient visits. The tone is confident, personal – and above all, authentic.
And that authenticity can feel like a shortcut to trust.
But in a digital health environment increasingly shaped by influencers, there’s an important distinction: feeling someone is trustworthy is not the same as being evidence-based.
Health content has become a major category across platforms like TikTok, Instagram and YouTube. On TikTok alone, the hashtag #healthtok had more than 350,000 posts by May 2026. At the same time, the influencer economy is expanding rapidly, with the global market projected to grow substantially.
Research suggests that social media influencers can shape how people think about health – sometimes in helpful ways, sometimes not. A systematic review on influencer impact found that influencer content can influence health attitudes and behaviours, largely through storytelling and repeated exposure. At the same time, health information on social media varies widely in quality. A systematic review on health misinformation found that the prevalence of health misinformation on social media varies widely by topic – with some studies reporting rates as high as 87 per cent – reflecting differences in platform, topic and how misinformation is measured.
Even when content isn’t outright wrong, it is often incomplete. Reviews of TikTok health content – such as this analysis of youth mental health content – suggest that videos can combine useful insights with oversimplified explanations or unsupported claims. In other words, the challenge isn’t just misinformation. It’s variability.
So why does this kind of content feel so convincing? Part of the answer is psychological. People tend to trust stories. Personal experiences are easier to understand and remember than statistics or study designs. When someone shares what worked for them, it feels tangible – even if it isn’t broadly applicable.
At the same time, social media reduces the distance between speaker and audience. Instead of formal expertise, viewers see someone who feels relatable, open and honest. Research suggests that communication style, perceived expertise and social cues can influence how audiences judge health information as credible. Concepts like authenticity – how genuine someone seems – have been widely studied in marketing and communications but remain less well established in health contexts.
But authenticity is not a measure of evidence quality. A person can be sincere, experienced and well-intentioned – and still share advice that doesn’t reflect the full scientific picture.
This shift in how people encounter health information has real implications. Patients don’t leave what they see online at the door when they enter a clinic. Influencer content can shape expectations, influence decisions and create confusion when personal anecdotes conflict with clinical guidance. For clinicians, this may mean more time spent contextualizing or correcting information. For patients, it can mean navigating a growing gap between what feels convincing and what is supported by evidence. In a health system already under strain, that gap matters.
The goal isn’t to dismiss influencer health content altogether. Some creators share helpful, accurate and responsibly communicated information. Others make health topics more accessible to audiences who might not engage with traditional sources. But instead of asking whether influencer advice is “good” or “bad,” a more useful question is how we are deciding what to trust.
A simple shift can help. When encountering health advice online, it’s worth pausing to ask whether a claim is based mainly on personal experience or whether it reflects a broader body of evidence. Does the message sound balanced, or unusually certain and dramatic? Does it align with what larger studies or health organizations generally say?
Research suggests that even small prompts to focus on accuracy can improve how people evaluate information online.
Authenticity is powerful. It builds attention, connection and trust. But in health, trust should rest on the quality of the evidence – not just how convincing something feels. In a world where anyone can share advice and everyone is exposed to it, learning to separate those two ideas may be one of the most important health skills we develop.
