Public health professionals are raising alarms over the appointment of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) by President-elect Donald Trump. Kennedy’s reputation for questioning vaccine safety and his history of spreading medical misinformation raise serious concerns about the future of health policy and scientific integrity in the United States.
Lawrence Gostin, the director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University, did not mince words, saying, “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 elaborated, “It’s a vast understatement to say that RFK Jr. is unqualified. The head of HHS should be grounded in science and evidence, yet he has spent his career eroding public confidence in health initiatives.”
If confirmed, Kennedy would be in charge of major health organizations, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), both part of HHS. After concluding his independent presidential bid, Kennedy endorsed Trump for the 2024 election and introduced a health initiative titled “Make America Healthy Again,” which aims to address issues such as chronic diseases, problematic food additives, and environmental toxins.
However, Kennedy has faced backlash for promoting false narratives, including the deeply discredited assertion linking vaccines to autism. Extensive studies have consistently affirmed the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. His opposition to fluoride in drinking water—a well-documented measure for preventing dental problems—has been tied to baseless health fears. He has also claimed that the FDA is hindering access to raw milk, ignoring the agency’s warnings about its health risks.
Read More: What Donald Trump’s Win Could Mean for Vaccines
Kennedy has assured the public that neither he nor the Trump Administration plans to eliminate vaccines from the market. Nevertheless, experts worry that he might appoint individuals to the FDA or CDC who share his skepticism about vaccines, which could obstruct vaccine approval processes. Gostin pointed out that while there are safeguards against drastic policy shifts, Kennedy could still influence the narrative by selectively presenting data that undermines vaccine safety, potentially eroding public confidence and leading to a rise in vaccine-preventable diseases.
Gostin cautioned that “cherry-picked” information from HHS could mislead the public, fostering a climate of distrust toward established health guidelines. He expressed a major concern: “If agencies like the FDA and CDC spread misleading information, it could have dire consequences for public health, resulting in lower vaccination rates and a resurgence of diseases such as measles and mumps.”
“A vaccine skeptic should not head our nation’s most vital health agencies,” he stressed. “Kennedy has consistently positioned himself against established scientific consensus, spreading misinformation that could endanger public health.”
Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and a former member of advisory panels for the CDC and FDA, expressed astonishment at the nomination, comparing it to appointing someone who questions gravity as the head of NASA. He criticized Kennedy for advocating a reduced focus on infectious diseases in National Institutes of Health (NIH) research.
“With the current H5N1 bird flu outbreak, cutting funding for infectious diseases seems illogical,” remarked Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist and founder of the newsletter Your Local Epidemiologist.
While Kennedy faces a challenging road to Senate confirmation, Offit noted that the mere nomination reflects a concerning trend regarding public trust in science. Experts are apprehensive that Kennedy’s potential leadership could further propagate medical misinformation.
Jetelina voiced her concerns: “There’s a substantial risk that misinformation will originate from such a powerful position, potentially leading to public confusion and raising doubts among those seeking evidence-based health information. My greatest fear is that disinformation will shift from being fringe beliefs to becoming mainstream narratives.”
While Kennedy’s positions on nutrition and food safety offer some hope to certain public health experts, skepticism remains about his overall efficacy. He advocates for banning food additives, resonating with national nutrition concerns. Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, director of the Food Is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, perceives potential in Kennedy’s nutritional focus but remains wary of its broader implications for public health.
“I’m cautiously optimistic and hesitant to judge RFK Jr. solely on his previous statements and actions,” Mozaffarian shared. “I hope he prioritizes sound science in his approach.”
However, following Trump’s announcement, many public health experts are left feeling disillusioned about the potential ramifications of Kennedy’s leadership at HHS. Gostin succinctly captured the prevailing sentiment: “In summary, he’s unlikely to give precedence to science, and instead of enhancing American health, he may further diminish public confidence in health policies.”
