One of my first blogs (October 2006) reported on a Pew Research Center survey that said that only 15% of health searchers always check the source and date of the health information that they find online.  Well, a 2010 survey found that only 25% of searchers are currently checking the authoritativeness of their source.  The more recent survey was conducted by the London School of Economics for Bupa, a British healthcare company.  12,000 people in 12 countries were surveyed Australia, Britain, Germany, Russia, China, Brazil, France, India, Mexico, Italy, Spain and the United States.  (Although not indicative of anything that I can think of, Russians were the most likely to search for health information online, 96%, and the French were the least likely, 59%).  Other survey findings that tie into the problem of not checking the health information source: 1)  68% of respondents are looking for information about specific medications when they go online to search for health information. 2)  39% of respondents who search online for health information are looking for information about other patients' experiences with a specific condition. 3)  46% of those interviewed said that when they search the Internet for health information they are using the information for self-diagnosis.   These findings show how important it is for a searcher to ensure that the source of the medical information is current and from a reliable and reputable source.  (The best way to do this is to check the "about us" link on the top of a website's homepage to verify exactly which individual, university, association, organization, or government entity is responsible for the medical information on the site and what their mission is. To ensure the timeliness of the information check the "revised" or "modified" date on the bottom of the webpage).  The statistics about self-diagnosis "force" me to nag again.  Be careful about this, many common symptoms can be associated with many different condtions, some serious, some not so much.  Save yourself from unnecessary worry by consulting a healthcare professional before you decide that you have something awful.  And on the other side of that, don't dismiss a symptom that might indicate something serious without checking with your doctor.  The survey did show a positive take on self-diagnosis when the authors stated:  "Access to good health information can potentially reduce the amount of contact time between health professionals and the 'worried well' (i.e. individuals who go to a medical facility with no discernible signs of ill health, or who are experiencing minor health problems such as coughs that may be managed without the need for medical consultation); this can free up resources that can be re-directed to people with diagnosable/severe diseases".  To aid those who are going to self-diagnose anyway, the authors suggest that accreditation procedures be set up to verify the accuracy and reliablity of a health information website.  And consumers need to know to look for this "seal" of accreditation on the website that they are using.  (Currently, there are at least 2 health-related website accreditation organizations that allow a website to display their "seal of approval" once it shows that it is following their accreditation procedures.  These organizations are the Health on the Net Foundation and URAC.) So as I said, the 2010 survey did not show much improvement from the 2006 survey in the percentage of health information searchers who check the trustworthinesss and timeliness of their Internet resources (25% compared to 15%).  Hopefully, 4 years from now, this percentage will increase by much more than 10%!