National Institutes of Health (NIH) – Bias and Credibility

These sources consist of legitimate science or are evidence based through the use of credible scientific sourcing.  Legitimate science follows the scientific method, is unbiased, and does not use emotional words.  These sources also respect the consensus of experts in the given scientific field and strive to publish peer-reviewed science. Some sources in this category may have a slight political bias but adhere to scientific principles. See all Pro-Science sources.

• Overall, we rate the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pro-Science based on its research mission, biomedical expertise, and publication of science-based health information. We rate NIH Mostly Factual and Medium Credibility due to generally reliable scientific content, offset by current leadership and parent-agency concerns involving misleading public health claims, vaccine-related misinformation, and pseudoscience risk.

Detailed Report

Bias Rating: PRO-SCIENCE (2.5)
Factual Reporting: MOSTLY FACTUAL (4.4)
Country: USA
MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MOSTLY FREE
Media Type: Organization/Foundation
Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY

History

Founded in 1887, The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a biomedical research facility primarily located in Bethesda, Maryland. An agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services, it is the primary agency of the United States government responsible for biomedical and health-related research. The NIH comprises 27 separate institutes and centers that conduct research in different disciplines of biomedical science. According to their about page, “The National Institutes of Health (NIH), a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is the nation’s medical research agency, making important discoveries that improve health and save lives.”

In April 2025, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya became Director of the NIH. NIH also operates under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which is led by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Read our profile on the United States government and media.

Funded by / Ownership

In review, the NIH website contains information on diseases, medical conditions, symptoms, causes, treatments, research programs, and clinical trials. NIH publications are generally based on biomedical research, peer-reviewed studies, expert review, and the work of its institutes and centers. The website frequently provides science-based public health information, such as Cancer Clinical Trials during Coronavirus: Information for People with Cancer. Articles often link to NIH institutes, clinical research resources, government databases, and external scientific sources. In general, the NIH remains a highly respected pro-science institution.

However, under the current HHS leadership of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and NIH leadership under Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, concerns have emerged regarding public health messaging, vaccine policy, and claims that conflict with mainstream scientific consensus. Kennedy has a long history of vaccine misinformation and pseudoscientific claims, and HHS leadership has promoted or amplified controversial claims regarding vaccines, autism, Tylenol, and other public health issues. These concerns do not erase NIH’s long-standing scientific role, but they introduce credibility risk because NIH operates under HHS.

Additionally, NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya has made misleading public claims regarding COVID-19 policy. For example, FactCheck.org reported that Bhattacharya said in a Fox News interview that the World Health Organization “absolutely failed during the pandemic” by “pushing” lockdown policies. FactCheck.org found this framing misleading, noting that WHO did not explicitly recommend lockdowns, though it recognized that such measures might be needed in some cases.

Therefore, while NIH remains fundamentally Pro-Science due to its mission, research output, clinical information, and expert-driven biomedical work, the current leadership environment warrants lowering factual reporting from High to Mostly Factual and credibility from High to Medium. Most NIH content remains reliable and science-based, but leadership influence and parent-agency pseudoscience concerns present an increased risk of misinformation.

Failed Fact Checks

• NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya suggested the WHO “pushed” lockdown policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. FactCheck.org found this misleading.

Overall, we rate the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pro-Science based on its research mission, biomedical expertise, and publication of science-based health information. We rate NIH Mostly Factual and Medium Credibility due to generally reliable scientific content, offset by current leadership and parent-agency concerns involving misleading public health claims, vaccine-related misinformation, and pseudoscience risk. (D. Van Zandt 8/26/2016) Updated (06/29/2026)

Source: https://www.nih.gov/