IT’S IMPORTANT to help correct false information—whether you’re chatting with someone online or having a conversation in person. On social media, this can feel especially tricky because people who are strongly against vaccines sometimes use debate tactics that make discussions feel frustrating or circular.
Here are a few common tactics you might encounter online—and gentle, respectful ways to respond if you choose to engage:
Appeal to emotion
Emotions often show up in discussions about health and safety. But sometimes, arguments rely only on fear or worry, without much evidence. It helps to acknowledge how someone is feeling, and then gently return to the facts.
Try saying:
I understand that hearing such things can be really frightening. Let’s look at what the facts tell us so we can feel more grounded in the truth.”
Special pleading (moving the goalposts)
Sometimes, when a point is clarified or disproven, a person might shift the topic or add a new exception. This can make it hard to have a focused conversation.
Try saying:
I noticed the topic has changed. Before we move forward, can we try to come to a shared understanding about what we were just talking about?”
Burden of proof
If someone makes a claim, it’s okay to kindly ask for evidence. You don’t have to disprove it yourself.
Try saying:
I know it can be frustrating to feel questioned, but when someone makes a claim, it’s fair to ask for supporting facts. Could you share your sources?”
Black-or-white thinking
This kind of thinking suggests that something must be either all good or all bad, but most things—including vaccines—live somewhere in the middle. Using everyday comparisons can help explain risk more clearly.
Try saying:
It’s true—nothing in life is 100% risk-free. But vaccines are one of the safest things we do, and they help protect us just like seatbelts or helmets do.”
Anecdotal argument
Personal stories can be powerful—but they don’t always reflect the bigger picture of research findings. It’s okay to honor someone’s experience while also pointing to broader scientific understanding.
Try saying:
I appreciate that this story is meaningful. When we’re making choices for our health, it helps to also look at the larger patterns in the science and what research tells us. Here’s what we know…”
Texas sharpshooter (cherry-picking)
Sometimes, people highlight only the data that supports their belief. In science, we look at the full picture to get accurate answers.
Try saying:
Some of the information you mentioned supports your view, but it’s important to look at all the evidence. When scientists do that, they often reach a very different conclusion.”
In-group bias
We tend to trust people who are like us—and that’s natural. But sometimes, it’s worth stepping back and considering what experts outside our circles are saying too.
Try saying:
I value what people close to me think, but when it comes to health, I put my trust in experts who are trained to look at all the evidence.”
Belief bias
When we already believe something, it’s easy to accept anything that supports it—even without strong evidence. A gentle way to invite someone to think critically is to ask them to flip the script.
Try saying:
Just as a thought experiment—what would you say if you were trying to argue the other side? Sometimes that helps us see the full picture.”
Backfire effect
Sometimes, people hold onto their beliefs even more strongly when shown contradictory evidence. That’s why asking thoughtful questions often works better than trying to “correct” someone directly.
Try saying:
I can see you’ve done some research. I’m curious—how do you think scientists went from where you are now to strongly supporting vaccines?”
The Dunning-Kruger effect
This describes when someone feels very confident in a subject they’ve just started exploring—before realizing how complex it really is. A respectful nudge toward trusting experts can go a long way.
Try saying:
I respect that you’ve spent time looking into this. I also know that experts have spent years studying it deeply, and I feel confident relying on their conclusions.”
Gish gallop
This happens when someone throws out a long list of points, making it hard to respond to everything. It’s okay to slow things down.
Try saying:
That’s a lot of information! Could we focus on the one issue that matters most to you right now?”
False balance
Sometimes, it seems like two opinions should be given equal weight—even if one is from a leading expert and the other is not. It’s okay to point out that not all voices carry the same level of expertise.
Try saying:
It’s important that we base our decisions on trusted experts who rely on evidence—not just on opinions. That helps keep everyone safer.”
The shill gambit
Sometimes people claim others are only sharing their view because they’re being paid. This sidesteps the facts.
Try saying:
Let’s stay focused on the topic and stick to the facts, rather than guessing at each other’s motivations.”
Just asking questions
Some people use lots of questions to stir doubt, rather than to understand. You can gently steer the conversation to something more meaningful.
Try saying:
It sounds like you have a lot on your mind. What’s the most important question to you right now—and why?”
Appeal to nature
Just because something is natural doesn’t mean it’s always good for us. But it’s okay to honor the idea behind this instinct.
Try saying:
I get wanting to trust nature. The amazing thing is—vaccines actually work with our natural immune system, helping it fight off serious diseases.”
Appeal to conspiracy theory
When people feel powerless, conspiracy theories can take hold. These beliefs can be hard to shift, and it’s okay to step back if needed.
Try saying:
I know it can feel hard to trust big systems. But health organizations across the world are made up of people who truly want to help others.”
A QUICK NOTE
If someone is deeply entrenched in conspiracy thinking, it’s okay to decide not to engage further. These conversations can spiral quickly, and protecting your energy matters too.
© Voices for Vaccines. Excerpts and links may be used by websites and blogs, provided that full and clear credit is given to Voices for Vaccines, with appropriate and specific direction and links to the original content. Parents, providers, advocates, and others may download and duplicate toolkits in print, without alteration, for non-commercial use and with full and proper attribution only.