Public health experts are deeply concerned about President-elect Donald Trump’s appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Kennedy, known for his skepticism regarding vaccines and his history of promoting medical misinformation and conspiracy theories, could pose significant risks to health policy and scientific integrity in the U.S.
Lawrence Gostin, who directs the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University, expressed a grim outlook, stating, “I can’t think of a darker day for public health and science itself than the election of Donald Trump and the nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health.”
He further emphasized, “To say that RFK Jr. is unqualified is a considerable understatement. The head of HHS should have a commitment to science and evidence, yet he has spent his career undermining public trust in health initiatives.”
If confirmed, Kennedy would oversee critical health agencies, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both of which fall under HHS. After ending his independent presidential campaign, Kennedy endorsed Trump for the 2024 election and has proposed a health initiative called “Make America Healthy Again,” which targets issues like chronic diseases, food additives, and environmental toxins.
Despite these initiatives, Kennedy has drawn criticism for spreading falsehoods, such as the discredited claim that vaccines lead to autism. Extensive research has consistently demonstrated the safety and efficacy of vaccines. His opposition to fluoride in drinking water—a practice recognized for its role in preventing dental issues—has been linked to a variety of unfounded health concerns. Additionally, he has accused the FDA of suppressing access to raw milk, despite the agency’s warnings about the potential health risks associated with it.
Read More: What Donald Trump’s Win Could Mean for Vaccines
Kennedy has stated that neither he nor the Trump Administration would remove vaccines from the market. However, experts are wary that he might appoint individuals to the FDA or CDC who share his anti-vaccine sentiments, potentially hindering vaccine approvals. Gostin mentioned that while there are mechanisms in place to prevent extreme policy changes, Kennedy could still exert influence by selectively presenting data that undermines vaccine safety, which could erode public trust and ultimately lead to increased cases of vaccine-preventable diseases.
Gostin warned that “cherry-picked” information from HHS might confuse the public, creating a climate of distrust in established health guidelines. He articulated a significant concern: “If agencies like the FDA and CDC disseminate misleading data, it could have severe repercussions on public health, resulting in lower vaccination rates and a resurgence of diseases like measles and mumps.”
“A vaccine skeptic should not be the head of our country’s most crucial health agencies,” he remarked. “Kennedy has consistently aligned himself outside established scientific consensus, propagating misinformation that could jeopardize public health.”
Dr. Paul Offit, who leads the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and has served on advisory panels for the CDC and FDA, expressed his shock at the nomination. He likened the situation to appointing someone who doubts gravity to lead NASA, criticizing Kennedy for suggesting a reduced emphasis on infectious diseases in NIH research.
“We are currently facing an H5N1 bird flu outbreak, and reducing funding for infectious diseases seems illogical,” remarked Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist and founder of the newsletter Your Local Epidemiologist.
Though Kennedy faces a challenging path to Senate confirmation, Offit noted that the mere nomination signals a troubling trend regarding public trust in science. Experts fear that Kennedy’s leadership could further perpetuate medical misinformation.
Jetelina shared her worries: “There’s a significant risk that misinformation will emanate from such a powerful position, potentially leading to confusion and raising concerns among the public who seek evidence-based health information. My greatest fear is that disinformation will transition from fringe beliefs to mainstream narratives.”
While Kennedy’s views on nutrition and food safety generate some optimism among certain public health experts, they remain skeptical about his overall effectiveness. He advocates for banning food additives, aligning with concerns about the national nutrition crisis. Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, director of the Food Is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, sees potential in Kennedy’s focus on nutrition but worries about his broader implications for public health.
“I’m hopeful and reluctant to judge RFK Jr. solely based on his past statements and actions,” Mozaffarian stated. “I hope he will prioritize sound science in his approach.”
However, following Trump’s announcement, many public health experts are left feeling disheartened about the potential consequences of Kennedy’s potential leadership at HHS. Gostin succinctly summarized the sentiment: “In short, he’s unlikely to prioritize science, and instead of making America healthier, he may contribute to further deterioration of public confidence in health policies.”
