‘Hybrid weapon of war’: Why climate disinformation could be a growing public health threat

WHO member states are being urged to recognise climate disinformation as a public health threat as vested interests attempt to “sow doubt and confusion”. ADVERTISEMENT ADVERTISEMENT Health and civil society organisations have called on 194 countries to make information integrity a core part of climate and health policy, preparedness and response. It follows the EU-backed landmark declaration to crack down on fake news and conspiracy theories that was launched at the COP30 summit in Belém last year. A new report, ‘Protecting Health in the Age of Climate Disinformation’, is said to be the first instance of the health community addressing how climate disinformation harms human health around the world – from undermining emergency warnings and public-health guidance to delaying policies on air pollution, clean energy and fossil fuels. The report, produced by the WHO Civil Society Working Group on Climate and Health, argues that a “healthier information environment” is not a communications luxury but a “condition for climate justice, public health and the right to a healthy future”. Climate disinformation refers to the intentional spread of false or misleading information about climate change and climate action. This includes the complete denial of global warming as well as conspiracy theories. It differs from climate misinformation, which is defined as false or out-of-context information that someone is presenting as fact. While misinformation does not carry the same level of intent as disinformation, it can result in equally dangerous consequences. How climate disinformation is impacting public health The report highlights several case studies where climate disinformation has interacted with existing inequalities and power structures. For example, after the 2023 Maui wildfires, false claims circulated online that residents who applied for disaster assistance could have their land or property seized by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Fact-checkers established this was false, but the rumour had potential to deter survivors from seeking aid at precisely the moment they needed housing support, financial assistance, medical care and recovery services. “In a disaster setting, misinformation is not just confusing,” the report reads. “It can directly obstruct access to life-saving and stabilising support.” In Europe, clean air policies such as low-emission zones – designed to reduce people’s exposure to harmful traffic-related pollution – are often targeted by misleading narratives. The debate around London’s Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ), which imposes a charge for vehicles that do not meet emissions standards, has included concerns about affordability and implementation, particularly for low-income households, workers, small businesses, and people who depend on older vehicles. But the report states that these concerns have also been “amplified and distorted” by misinformation, politicised attacks on air quality evidence, fake social media claims, and in some cases even violent backlash against ULEZ infrastructure. “The backlash against ULEZ shows how disinformation can turn a public health intervention into a culture-war issue,” the report states. “Instead of focusing debate on how to reduce pollution while protecting those least able to bear transition costs, misinformation can shift attention toward fear, mistrust, and false claims. This risks weakening public support for policies that protect lungs, hearts, pregnancies, children, and communities most exposed to polluted air.” Other case studies in the report highlight the interests and power structures that “enable disinformation to flourish”, including fossil fuel greenwashing and conflicts of interest. Dr Jeni Miller, Executive Director of the Global Climate and Health Alliance, and co-chair of the WHO Civil Society Working Group on Climate and Health, says governments must integrate tools for mis- and disinformation response into how they prepare and communicate heat, wildfire, flood, storm, drought and infectious disease scenarios. “Climate disinformation is not only a problem of false rumours and mistruths; it is also a problem of power, incentives and accountability,” Miller adds. “WHO, its member states, health institutions and the health community must go beyond simply providing better information and messaging – they must establish robust conflict-of-interest safeguards against fossil fuel greenwashing, and against those who wield climate disinformation as a hybrid weapon of war.” Dr Laura Jung, Chair of the Working Group on Environment, World Medical Association, argues that the public health impacts of climate disinformation can be “immediate”. “Misleading information can for example discourage people from evacuating during wildfires or floods, undermine confidence in heat and air-pollution warnings, interfere with access to disaster assistance, and create confusion about health risks during emergencies,” she explains. How to spot climate disinformation As part of the efforts to address the issue of fake news, the European Commission’s Directorate-General for climate action recently launched a campaign called #ClimateFactsMatter. It aims to “empower people” to see through climate disinformation and reveals the main techniques used to mislead the public. The campaign urges members of the public to always check the source of an article they’re reading, fact-check ‘expert’ comments, look out for loaded, emotional language, and fact-check stories claiming to have a ‘quick solution’ to climate change.