Kennedy’s Health Policies Spark Turmoil Within US Agencies
the confirmation of Robert Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health has ushered in an era of dramatic change – and escalating controversy – within the US Department of Health and Human Services. Since assuming office in February 2025, Kennedy’s tenure has been marked by staff reductions, policy reversals regarding vaccine protocols, and a deeply unsettling shooting at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta.
On August 8th, a man, citing mental health issues he attributed to COVID-19 vaccines, opened fire at the CDC offices, killing a police officer before taking his own life. While Kennedy offered condolences, his delayed visit to Atlanta drew criticism, particularly given his past accusations of corruption against the CDC and his widely debunked claims that the anti-COVID vaccine was “the most lethal ever created.”) Hundreds of CDC employees later signed an open letter imploring Kennedy to cease disseminating what they termed “inaccurate information” about vaccines.
The attack, according to sources within the agency, amplified existing anger towards the Secretary. William Foege,an 89-year-old former CDC director instrumental in eradicating smallpox in the 1970s,reportedly stated that Kennedy’s rhetoric coudl be “as lethal as the smallpox virus.”) Despite this,Kennedy has publicly questioned the CDC’s assertion that vaccines rank among the ten major advancements in medicine,suggesting a need to “get rid of some people to change institutional culture.”
Kennedy’s shift in priorities comes a year after he ended his independent bid for the White House to align with Donald Trump. At a rally in Glendale,Arizona,he unveiled the “Maha” (Make America Healthy Again) slogan – a direct echo of Trump’s “make America Great Again” – which quickly became a rallying cry for his supporters.Since his appointment, Maha has become central to his political agenda.)
in June 2025, Kennedy dismissed all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), replacing them with individuals largely critical of existing COVID-19 vaccine policies. The newly constituted committee announced plans to review the cumulative effects of the entire childhood vaccination schedule, a move that has alarmed public health experts.) Earlier, in May, Kennedy bypassed both CDC staff and the ACIP, declaring that health officials would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for children and pregnant women in good health.
Kennedy’s long-standing skepticism towards vaccines extends beyond COVID-19; he has previously criticized measles vaccines and advocated for vitamin A as a cure. As Secretary, he has reportedly pushed the CDC to recommend vitamin A to patients, despite expert warnings that while it can benefit those already ill, it is not a substitute for preventative vaccination and can be hazardous in excess.)
However, Kennedy’s agenda isn’t entirely at odds with established medical consensus. Some of his goals,particularly regarding nutrition,align with expert recommendations. New York Times commentator Ezra Klein has described Maha as a “bad answer to a good question,” acknowledging the validity of some underlying concerns. Kennedy has achieved some success in advocating for the gradual removal of synthetic dyes from food.)
Yet, a recent analysis by Stat News revealed that in his first six months in office, Kennedy had to “walk back or break some of his key promises,” including commitments to improve addiction recovery services and introduce federal regulations for reduced sodium and sugar content in foods. A thorough plan to address chronic diseases remains elusive, partially due to budget cuts.)
Perhaps the most contentious aspect of Kennedy’s leadership is his approach to vaccine research.He announced a $500 million reduction in funding for the development of new mRNA-based vaccines, while simultaneously allocating funds to investigate a link between vaccines and autism – a connection repeatedly disproven by years of scientific study.)
The Secretary’s policies are reshaping the landscape of public health in the United states, raising profound questions about the future of preventative medicine and the role of scientific expertise in government decision-making.)
