“We are what we believe we are.”
C. S. Lewis
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Believing is like blinking. Both are there for our self-protection and occur so frequently we barely notice them [1]. Like any of our other mechanisms to protect ourselves, the presence and power of our beliefs become apparent once they fail. Only at that point, we recognize their essential value in helping us contain the challenges we encounter, constantly, throughout our lives. Challenges that manage to break through our belief systems are usually the most serious. They are often existential threats, which confront us with our mortality.
What we often overlook is that, when we face such threats, our beliefs can turn against us, morphing into weapons of mass destruction, directed at the very foundations of our way of life. We are now facing an unprecedented belief crisis, one in which our inability as a species to agree about what is credible, and whom to trust, is growing. The depth of this crisis is reflected in how easily ‘fake news’, conspiratorial thinking and misinformation can overpower scientific evidence. This is weakening our capacity for sense making and collective action around policies to curb major challenges to human survival such as pandemics or climate change [2, 3].
The belief crisis is being hastened by the complicity of people holding positions of power. At a time when they are expected to act as trustworthy leaders capable of joining forces across ideological, geographical, cultural, and sectoral lines, most of them are reacting as mere custodians of the resources in their political, corporate, or academic purview. Thus, they are squandering a historical opportunity to muster a unified, strong, fair, transparent, accountable and effective response to secure our continued presence on the planet, leaving in their trail a panoply of disappointing decisions that in many cases are blatantly incompetent, ignorant, negligent, malicious or corrupt [4].
The most concerning sign of the crisis is the erosion of trust—a social emotion that depends on the belief that others are reliable and will act benevolently [5, 6]. Surveys have been showing consistently that less than half of people worldwide trust their government agents, journalists, corporate leaders, and even physicians and nurses [7,8,9].
Curiously, despite their active and essential involvement in efforts to curb existential threats, public health professionals have remained out of the public eye. This is reflected by the apparent absence of studies about how much they are believed or trusted, and by their own reports about feeling invisible [10]. Such invisibility, which could easily be regarded as a weakness, might end up being the strongest suit for the public health community in these critical times. Indeed, the behind-the-scenes and unassuming ‘in-betweenness’ that characterizes most public health professionals is what places them in a privileged position to provide the dependable links that are so badly needed to rebuild and nurture trust at all levels and across all sectors.
The question is whether public health experts are able to believe that they might be the only large enough group left with the capacity, knowledge and trustworthiness required to fulfill this crucial role, so that we could adapt and thrive, even if there is nothing that could be done to revert or stop the challenges themselves.
Let’s hope they are.
Alejandro R. Jadad, MD, DPhil, FRCPC, FCAHS, FRSA, LLD; Founder, Centre for Digital Therapeutics, Toronto, Canada; Member, Public Health Leadership Coalition, World Federation of Public Health Associations.
References
Porot N, Mandalbaum E. The science of belief: a progress report. Wiley Interdiscip Reg Cogn Sci. 2021;12(2):e1539.
West JD, Bergstrom CT. Misinformation in and about science. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2021;118(15):e1912444117.
Biddlestone M, Azevedo F, van der Linden S. Climate of conspiracy: a meta-analysis of the consequences of belief in conspiracy theories about climate change. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022;11:101390.
Jadad AR. Facing leadership that kills. J Public Health Policy. 2021;42(4):651–7. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-021-00315-9.
Simpson E. Reasonable trust. Eur J Philos. 2013;21(3):402–23.
Walterbusch M, Gräuler M, Teuteberg F. How trust is defined: a qualitative and quantitative analysis of scientific literature. In: AMCIS 2014 Aug. https://www-assist.uwi.uni-osnabrueck.de/reddot/Appendix_TrustDefinitions_AMCIS2014.pdf. Accessed on Dec 5 2022
OECD. Building Trust to Reinforce Democracy: Main Findings from the 2021 OECD Survey on Drivers of Trust in Public Institutions, Building Trust in Public Institutions. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1787/b407f99c-en.
Wellcome Global Monitor 2020. COVID-19. https://wellcome.org/reports/wellcome-global-monitor-covid-19/2020. Accessed on Dec 5 2022
Newman N, Fletcher R, Robertson CT, Nielsen EK. Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2022. Reuters Institute & University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022. Accessed on Dec 5 2022
Kar-Purkayastha I. Public health: invisible in plain sight. BMJ. 2022;376:o305.
Author information
Consortia
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The content of The Federation’s Pages is selected and edited by the WFPHA and not sent through by JPHP’s usual process of peer review.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jadad, A.R., on behalf of the members of the Public Health Leadership Coalition, World Federation of Public Health Associations. Could we survive a belief crisis?. J Public Health Pol 44, 167–169 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-022-00381-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41271-022-00381-7