Former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will face his confirmation hearing before the United States Senate on Jan. 29 to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) following his nomination by President Donald Trump in November 2024. Kennedy’s nomination has drawn widespread criticism from public health experts about the potential implications for global health initiatives and public trust given his controversial stances on various matters of public health.
Kennedy’s history of openly promoting vaccine skepticism in particular has drawn a great deal of criticism.
John Kraemer, an associate professor of health management and policy at Georgetown University, said Kennedy’s record, including his promotion of debunked conspiracy theories linking vaccines to autism, was appalling.
“Robert Kennedy has spent his entire career spreading false conspiracy theories that vaccines are dangerous and linked to autism,” Kraemer wrote to The Hoya. “He regularly distorts or flat-out lies about the underlying science. It would be irresponsible to put him in any position of public trust, let alone HHS secretary.”
Kraemer said Kennedy’s previous petition to withdraw COVID-19 vaccines from the market and support of disproven treatments like ivermectin only add to the risks of his leadership.
“If the U.S. government cuts back — or undermines trust in — vaccination, many children will die for no reason,” Kraemer wrote.
Michael Stoto, professor emeritus of healthcare management and policy at Georgetown, said maintaining people’s trust in successful health policies, especially during moments of crisis, is essential to promoting public health.
“Public adherence to these measures depends on citizens’ trust that the government knows what it is doing and is acting for the common good,” Stoto wrote to The Hoya.
Stoto said the decline in scientific consensus and public health accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of growing partisan divides in the United States.
“Trust in science and public health has been falling for years, but accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic in part because partisans found it easier to criticize the science rather than face up to the hard tradeoffs between individual rights and community well-being,” Stoto wrote.
Kennedy’s nomination has prompted experts to reevaluate the interplay between politics and public health.
Kraemer said that while public health decisions are inherently political, undermining scientific evidence for political advantage can be dangerous.
“There is a real difference between the inevitable politics of public health interventions and the bad-faith politicization of public health science,” Kraemer wrote. “Distorting the scientific evidence — as Kennedy regularly does — is outside the bounds of responsible behavior.”
Stoto said collaboration between public health leaders, scientists and politicians is not cohesive enough.
“Public health leaders should understand that elected officials rather than scientists must make policy decisions that weigh individual rights and harms against community benefits,” Stoto wrote. “Scientists and public health experts, on the other hand, must inform those decisions: They must identify the options and give their best estimates of the benefits and harms.”
Amid the wider controversy, some Georgetown students have shared experiences to dispel misinformation surrounding vaccines.
Saathvik Poluri (CAS ’28), who studies biochemistry, said his father’s experiences during the 1992 polio outbreak in India have demonstrated simply the effectiveness of vaccines.
“Over 70 percent of the people who had the virus were not vaccinated. But as soon as the vaccine was introduced, the effectiveness was clear,” Poluri told The Hoya. “With just two doses of the vaccine, there was over a 90 percent success rate. Ever since 2014, polio cases in India have been at record lows.”
Poluri urged students to follow proven research and evidence, not matters of opinion, in order to fight against vaccine stigma.
“In countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan, political distrust has kept polio cases prevalent,” Poluri said. “Students should take active strides in doing their research and looking after the latest biomedical advancements.”
Stoto said Georgetown students interested in pursuing careers in public health should learn strategies for gathering objective data and conducting research.
“Public health scientists in training need to learn about the best approaches to obtaining better objective data and information, and indeed conduct research to develop even better approaches for the future,” Stoto wrote.
Kraemer said the concerns raised by medical professionals, academics and students regarding Kennedy’s nomination underline the desperate need for leadership that balances evidence-based science, politics and the priority of public health.
“Elected officials do not have to use public health cynically to win parochial political points,” Kraemer wrote. “Those who do — including Kennedy — should be ashamed of themselves.”