President Donald J. Trump’s well-meaning prospective “Make America Healthy Again (MAHA)” appointment of lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and blanket acceptance of his policies have seriously undermined the current and future health and safety of the American people.
A majority view among those of us scientifically trained public health professionals opposes most of the misinformed and distorted strategies implemented by Mr. Kennedy, who has no scientific or medical credentials or degrees. Unfortunately, he has been able to attract some eccentric scientific/medically trained professionals to join with him for leading appointed positions in pertinent government health agencies.
The Trump-Kennedy administration’s aims were to restore public health focus on increasing government transparency and reorient federal health agencies. Initially, Kennedy targeted chronic childhood diseases and investigated alleged issues with vaccine injury, chemical exposure, and the food supply.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced six priorities for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), including restoring its focus on infectious diseases and enhancing scientific rigor. Plans early on involved modernizing data and laboratory systems and investing in the public health workforce.
In order to address trust and transparency, proponents of the MAHA initiative argued that it is a necessary corrective to what they see as the overreach of federal agencies during the COVID-19 pandemic. They view Kennedy’s efforts to increase transparency and investigate vaccines and chronic disease as central to rebuilding public trust.
Nonetheless, the policies devised and implemented by the HHS Secretary are ironically detrimental and diametrically counter to the President’s MAHA mandate. They have seriously undermined conventional, established, reasonably efficacious scientific public health principles by:
- Politicizing health: The MAHA agenda and other policies appear to be more about rewarding political allies and appeasing a loyal base than following scientific consensus and expertise. Dismissal of career officials and experts further serves to politicize federal health institutions.
- Undermining federal agencies: Kennedy’s actions, such as firing all 17 members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee (ACIP) and replacing them with members more aligned with his skeptical views, attack the very fabric of science-based public health. This new ACIP reversed the COVID-19 vaccine policy previously recommended for guiding vaccinations for children and pregnant women, a decision made without new scientific evidence of harm. Another example is the mass firing of top CDC officials like the highly respected PhD microbiologist and immunologist Director, Dr. Susan Monarez, in late August 2025
- Encouraging politically motivated research: The CDC was instructed to award a no-bid contract to a research institute to investigate a potential link between vaccines and autism, a claim that has been repeatedly debunked by decades of research. The CDC drew widespread criticism from the scientific and medical community for its intent to award a no-bid contract to the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) to study the debunked link between vaccines and autism. The decision was viewed by experts as politically motivated, undermining public health by revisiting an issue conclusively settled by decades of research.
- Reversal of COVID-19 vaccine policy: The ACIP committee has reversed previous guidance to recommend COVID-19 vaccines for children and pregnant women. This decision was made without new scientific evidence of harm. During its first meeting, members of the new committee raised questions about the scientific basis for CDC safety monitoring, including its ability to identify long-term complications from COVID-19 vaccination. Kennedy has made several controversial changes to vaccine policy. In July 2025, he removed the COVID-19 vaccine from the recommended immunization schedule for healthy children and pregnant women, a decision that is not supported by science. This led to confusion and potential barriers to access, as insurance providers may not cover unrecommended vaccines. In August 2025, he cut $500 million in funding for mRNA vaccine development, claiming the vaccines are ineffective against some respiratory infections.
- Dismissal of scientific input: The new committee is a departure from scientific principles, with members who have a record of questioning vaccines and may lack relevant expertise. The new committee may be dismissive of vaccines and discourage their use.
- Reducing state and local public health funding: Kennedy’s department tore back approximately $11 billion in approved public health funding intended for state and local public health departments. This has significantly reduced the nation’s capacity to respond to infectious disease threats, such as the ongoing measles epidemic.
- Vaccine misinformation: Kennedy has been and is an irrationally dangerous vaccine skeptic and has a decades-long history of promoting debunked conspiracy theories linking vaccines to autism and other health problems. The One Health Initiative team recently urged President Trump to “Protect [his] historic healthcare achievement before it is too late.” This vaccine situation is relevant among millions of American citizens including crowds of protesters in ‘No Kings’ rallies across the nation on Oct. 18, 2025, against the “rollback of vaccine requirements” among several other issues.
All of these comportments by HHS erode the scientific foundation of agencies like the CDC, formerly the premier national and international public health authority/expert for decades, and the NIH.
Related Articles
Here is a list of articles selected by our Editorial Board that have gained significant interest from the public:
Actions undermining the NIH:
- Firing top scientists: In October 2025, following a whistle-blower complaint, Kennedy fired Jeanne Marrazzo, MD, MPH, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. This occurred after Dr. Marrazzo’s demotion and placement on administrative leave in the spring. Marrazzo and other dismissed institute directors had reportedly objected to administration actions and unscientific views regarding vaccines and health research.
- Halting pandemic prevention research: Kennedy ended a major NIH network focused on preventing future pandemics. The network was known as the Research and Development of Vaccines and Monoclonal Antibodies for Pandemic Preparedness network (ReVAMPP). This was part of a broader effort to shift research focus away from infectious diseases and toward chronic conditions.
- Cutting grants and research funding: The NIH has distributed billions less in funding and awarded thousands fewer grants than in a typical year under Kennedy’s oversight. These changes have reportedly resulted in significant impacts, including stalled clinical trials, reductions in training opportunities for scientists, and research projects being abandoned.
- Weakening environmental protections: Despite Kennedy’s past as a prominent and successful environmental lawyer, having a large devoted follower base, and being one of the most influential environmentalists in the United States, the administration has simultaneously pursued policies that weaken environmental protections. For example, weakening safeguards against pollutants is inconsistent with the goal of reducing chronic diseases linked to environmental toxins.
Needed pathways forward for encouraging a Rational Administration Approach Correction — before it is too late:
- Congressional oversight: The legislative branch — especially Republican leaders — must begin to play a role in scrutinizing and challenging administration policies. Public health advocates should pressure members of Congress to hold hearings, introduce legislation, or restrict funding for initiatives they deem harmful.
- State and local action: Public health is not solely determined at the federal level. State and local governments, as well as non-governmental organizations, must push back against federal directives and continue to promote evidence-based practices and programs.
- Engaging the public: Restoring public trust is critically essential and requires a skillful, repetitive communication approach. The promotion of factual, science-based information is the only avenue for countering disinformation and rebuilding public confidence in health experts and institutions. More extensive utilization of professional public affairs (and public relations) expertise would likely enhance efficacy in this regard. Incorporating professional communication strategies will improve overall effectiveness. Public affairs focuses on influencing public policy, while public relations shapes public perception and helps build trust, with both functions working to create a favorable and more supportive operating environment.
- Electoral politics: The ultimate path to policy change would be through the democratic process. Future elections will determine who leads the executive branch and controls Congress, which in turn will shape the future direction of public health policy.
Even many of Trump’s most vehement critics recognize [perhaps reluctantly] that his “Big gamble on tackling the Middle East’s intractable problems” has been a huge success to date. The President and his ardent followers need to see the light and emulate by reversing this devastating MAHA catastrophe in order to help preserve an untarnished legacy here as well as with his mRNA COVID-19 “historic healthcare achievement.” Let us hope this is also not too late.
