Kennedy report was a troubling start for his MAHA campaign

When Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr. released his Make America Healthy Again report last month, there was a moment of cautious hope about pieces of it, especially its spotlight on nutrition and the impact of social media.

Then the reality became clear — and undermined even the best parts of the 73-page analysis: The report was riddled with errors and fake or false citations. When they were supposedly fixed, some of the new citations and claims were wrong, too.

Kennedy has further undermined his efforts by removing all members of the trusted Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which recommends formulations and uses of vaccines. He has named eight new members, including several who have shared misinformation, doubts and even conspiracy theories about vaccine safety and efficacy.

That latest move puts the MAHA report and its errors into sharp context. Whether the incorrect information was the result of AI-driven mistakes, bureaucratic incompetence, or intentional efforts to create evidence to support conclusions that have no factual grounding isn’t clear. What is clear is that Kennedy’s first go at a doctrine on which to base his department’s work cannot be trusted.

That impacts how even legitimate concerns about nutritional standards, rethinking dietary guidelines, and limiting sweeteners are viewed. In other areas, the report’s inability to provide legitimate sourcing and credentials underscores its reliance on proven falsehoods, dangerous assumptions, and faulty logic regarding medication, environmental issues, and vaccination. At times, it regrettably relied on Kennedy’s long-held fictional assumptions and favorite vaccine tropes. At one point, the report admitted the obvious: Kennedy and his colleagues don’t care about fact or truth when it conflicts with their conclusions. Regarding its puzzling view that therapy and social-emotional learning are to blame for rising anxiety and depression, the report said: “Though controversial and disputed by many experts, this perspective remains viable and warrants rigorous scientific investigation . . . ”

Relying on “controversial and disputed” conclusions is a thread, illustrated most boldly in the vaccination discussion which erroneously criticizes the childhood vaccine schedule, says clinical trials are not “rigorous” enough, argues there’s not enough science on “vaccine injury,” and claims vaccines play a “possible role in the growing childhood chronic disease crisis,” a clear nod to the debunked linkage between vaccines and autism. All of that, the report says, demands “inquiry.”

That’s where danger looms. Our nation’s public health leaders are rejecting science and fact, using inaccurate sources and information, and conducting investigations with no basis in reality. They — and the new panelists who seem to agree with them — will set future critical policies that could adversely impact our children’s health. That’s frightening.

Using nonexistent sources and incorrect citations to cast doubt over long-proven science is irresponsible. Changing standards or loosening requirements based on such falsehoods should be a nonstarter.