Kennedy health plan faces strong criticism

A pointed critique argues that Kennedy’s approach to public health could undermine essential work and public trust.

RFK Jr. Can’t Fix America’s Health-And He Isn’t Even Trying

When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was named secretary of health and human services, some voters hoped for a bold shift in how public health is run. Calley Means argued that the public health–expert class has produced a collapse in how we manage health, with spending swelling while outcomes lag. The piece notes that Kennedy’s stance feeds into broader conspiracy-minded currents in American politics and warns that such views could derail evidence-based health policy.
The article then contends that most chronic conditions in the United States stem from behavior and environment rather than government action alone. It critiques Kennedy for actions that reduce traditional public health functions, such as disbanding advisory committees, canceling funding for mRNA vaccine research, and reshaping vaccine guidance. It argues that while personal choices matter, government remains essential in prevention, vaccine guidance, and research, and that his approach risks leaving the country less prepared for future health threats.

The piece highlights a clash between personal responsibility and government intervention in health care. It suggests that political branding around health can overshadow complex science and undermine trust in experts. The risk is that policy becomes a battleground for ideology, not a scaffold for evidence and public safety.
It also points to a broader trend: when health questions become politically charged, public health tools can be weakened just when they are most needed. The warning is clear — public confidence in health institutions may erode if policy is driven more by rhetoric than data.

Highlights

The health policy path ahead will test whether science can lead politics or if the opposite dominates.