Is Polarisation Bad for Our Health? Summit 2026 Session

Why It Matters

Recognizing and addressing the values gap between experts and the wider public is critical for effective public-health communication and policy uptake; failure to do so could deepen polarization and undermine trust in science. Understanding segmentation enables more targeted engagement to protect public-health outcomes.

Summary

At the Summit session, panelists discussed how public beliefs and values shape responses to health information, highlighting research from More in Common that segments the UK into seven values-based groups. The audience—largely institutional and expert-aligned—differs markedly from much of the country, where skepticism and feelings that systems don’t work are more common. Panelists warned that when support for science becomes bundled with a particular set of progressive values, it risks alienating groups who reject other elements of that value package. They urged institutions to recognize this values gap and tailor engagement strategies accordingly, with a fuller report due in April.

Original Description

A debate about how growing political and social polarisation affects health outcomes, public debate and the ability to build consensus around evidence-based policy.

Chair: Leonora Merry: Director of Communications and Public Affairs, Nuffield Trust

Panel:

Mark Henderson, Executive Director of Corporate Affairs and Engagement, Wellcome Trust

Samira Ben Omar, Community-led Collaboration Specialist, Samira Ben Omar Associates

Dr Deborah Cohen, Freelance journalist and Visiting Senior Fellow, LSE Health

Session at Nuffield Trust Summit, Beaumont House, Windsor, 5 March 2026