The Challenge of Google for Health-Related Search Queries

In today's digitized world, Google is one of the best tools that people use for almost any information, health-related queries even more so. Still, the great amount of medical content available online poses a great challenge to medical institutions in terms of rendering authenticity, authority, and trustworthiness to the health information given to users. Many users will first turn to a search engine to find advice on medical matters, but not all of them realize that such information can carry considerable risks of being unverified or inaccurate.

These concerns turn on the authenticity of facts, the authority of health-related content, and the website's trustworthiness. Concerning these matters, even if the discussion is on a forum post, it sounds quite practical and generates that "real-life" experience in people's lives.

Users find themselves relying on unreliable or inaccurate health information. But what really seem to bother users are the authenticity of facts, the authority of health-related content, and the website's trustworthiness.

1. Authenticity of Facts: The Risk of Misinformation

With the rise of online health apps, the authenticity of facts has remained a growing concern. This expanse of content-from web pages to videos and articles-claims to provide legitimate medical advice, yet many of those have little to no scientific support or rigorous research behind them, allowing false or misleading information to permeate.

This situation gained particular prominence with the almost indiscriminate advice offered on health matters without any citation of credible references or authoritative medical sources. For instance, during search queries dealing with health issues like "home remedies for colds," readers may chance upon articles that are either overly embellished or unsupported in their claims and are sometimes recommending treatments that have no scientific basis or might even do harm. It is almost impossible for an untrained eye to tell the difference between true bona fide advice and down-and-out pseudoscience unless one goes through careful scrutiny.

What Google Is Doing: To deal with misinformation, Google has taken action among other things, introducing "Your Money or Your Life" (YMYL), which gives additional importance to content that directly affects the health and welfare of the users. Content is rated based on "E-A-T" - thus we have "Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness" - but how well all these work with respect to actual results is a challenge.

2. Authority of the Health-Related Message

Another important issue is the authority of the medical content. Who is the source? The author is either an authority-laden medical person with appropriate expertise or someone without any sort of medical training, expressing opinions without genuine creds. Sadly, many health-related articles are simply incoherently produced by people who have no right whatsoever to comment about health-related issues. In many instances, some health blogs are written by content writers or digital marketers who do not understand healthcare at all; they will rely on AI-based tools to pen their medical scraps.

Sure, but AI text generation does not guarantee that the generated information is truly accurate, applicable, and safe. Most therapeutic content produced by AI lacks personal input, and when in doubt, its advice is often on the basis of obsolete or incomplete data. Worst of all, it might even lead to the dissemination of horrible advice, undermining the much-needed treatment for some severe conditions. For example, advice that suggests enacting home remedies in opposition to professional medical treatment could cause further harm, or delay the course of necessary treatment.

What do doctors say: Healthcare professionals place very high priority on evidence-based medicine — research that has been widely disseminated for scrutiny and proven effective under clinical testing situation. For the Doctors, physicians, and licensed practitioners to be able to share credible and valid notes on scientific research and clinical guidelines.

3. Trustworthiness of Health Websites

The trustworthiness of the sites performing the medical information delivery is one major factor to consider by Google and its users. The internet is an ocean of resources but does it have many such high-quality sites. Some websites have a poor reputation but end up at the very top on the search engines, offering medical advice that could put people at risk. These websites do not have a secure HTTPS connection, have questionable user-generated content, or thy are loaded with advertisements and clickbait titles. Such sites are mostly made for revenue generation rather than accurate information.

Verification of Trustworthiness:

• HTTPS encryption check: A real site by an SSL certificate and encrypts all data passing between the user's browser and the server.
• Research and citation: Established health sites often cite peer-reviewed journals, clinical trials, and other reputable sources such as garnerment health agencies (e.g. WHO, CDC).
• Expert authorship: See whether the content is written or reviewed by a qualified medical professional, that is, a doctor or a registered nurse.

4.The Dangers of Non-Qualified Authors Using AI for Health Advice

Since the emergence of AI and content generation tools, a significant share of health articles has witnessed some level of assistance from such technology. Such intervention can shorten the time taken to create content, yet it raises grave concerns regarding the quality of information that goes out. AI lacks the ability to perceive the subtleties of human health, to diagnose, or to give personalized advice. Speaking from another perspective, this is telling of the fact that non-medical authors can leverage AI to create documents that look authoritative on the surface but with incomplete or incorrect information as the basis of such texts. AI-generated health articles distinguish poorly between the general advice and personal implications that in medicine make all the difference. Ill-advised recommendations from a non-doctor could have a cascade of adverse effects on the masses, further propagated by AI tools.

5. A Possible Solution: Categorizing Health Advice

A practical suggestion to deal with such kinds of problems would be classifying health-related contents with respect to the source of the advice: what the doctors have suggested versus the people.

• What Doctors Suggest: Contents prepared by certified medical personnel and based on peer-reviewed studies, clinical practice standards, and evidence-based protocols. This is a powerful source of advice because it comes from the most qualified personnel to evaluate and interpret medical research materials.
• What People Suggest: From the mouths of non-experts or users who may base their advice on experiences or semi-science validated anecdotal home remedies. These are not necessarily terribly beneficial, but should be considered as add-ons to the real source in supporting a medical decision.

A clear distinction between clinically proven medical information from an expert and content generated by unaided users would facilitate a much easier navigation system for the public through the colossal current of health-related information, where they could decide what might be trusted and what should be viewed with caution.

Conclusion: The Role of Google in Health-Related Search Queries

Ranking and displaying medical content is a complicated affair for Google. There have been significant gains in the application of the EAT principle and the quality of health content, but much more work remains to ensure that users get health information that is accurate, safe, and trustworthy. In the end, however, the onus must fall on the individuals to question and verify their source of information and consult an appropriate health professional when in doubt. Improving the credibility of expert-backed material and becoming wary of unverified advice could potentially decrease deadly consequences associated with unreliable health information.