It shouldn’t be necessary to say this: Every day that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. remains in charge of America’s public health system, the health of every American is at greater risk.
The Department of Health and Human Services exists to protect Americans from disease, contamination and preventable death. It depends on science, expertise and public trust. RFK Jr., now its secretary, has long questioned the scientific consensus on vaccines and other core public-health tools. The tension between those views and the mission of HHS isn’t theoretical; it is immediate and consequential.
HHS oversees vaccines, food and drug safety, disease surveillance, medical research, and emergency health responses. Much of its work happens quietly, noticed only when it fails. Its effectiveness rests on credibility: the public’s confidence that health guidance is grounded in evidence rather than ideology. That confidence is harder to sustain when the agency’s leader has built a public profile on skepticism toward established science.
For years Kennedy has worked not simply to question specific vaccines or treatments, but to cast doubt on the scientific enterprise itself — on research, on data and on the idea that fact-based medicine should guide health care decisions. He regularly portrays medical science as suspect, and institutions built on evidence as fundamentally untrustworthy. Those claims, long rejected by scientists and physicians, once lived at the fringes of public discourse. They now carry institutional weight — not because they have become more credible, but because leadership determines which facts are defended, which expertise is respected and which truths are allowed to blur into doubt.
This matters because vaccine skepticism isn’t an intellectual exercise; it is a public health failure in slow motion. Declining vaccination rates are directly tied to the return of diseases once considered under control. Measles outbreaks are no longer theoretical; they are occurring now. When the HHS secretary consistently undermines confidence in science itself, the signal to the public is destabilizing: Evidence is optional, expertise is suspect, and facts are just other opinions. Parents are left navigating fear and misinformation instead of receiving clear guidance, and the consequences fall most heavily on children and vulnerable communities. This is what irresponsible, reckless anti-science posturing looks like when it moves from rhetoric to governance.
The greatest risk of RFK Jr.’s leadership isn’t dramatic upheaval. Public health rarely unravels overnight. More often, it weakens gradually. Guidance becomes less decisive. Research is second-guessed in ways that stall action rather than improve it. Fringe ideas receive attention in the name of balance. The result is delay — and in public health, delay costs lives.
The administration’s decision to put Kennedy in charge of HHS reflects a troubling willingness to treat scientific expertise as negotiable. HHS was created because societies learned, often through painful experience, that coordinated, evidence-based action saves lives. Undermining that foundation doesn’t lead to better outcomes; it invites preventable harm.
That harm will not be shared equally. Children, the elderly, the immunocompromised, and communities with limited access to care are always the most vulnerable when public health falters. Doctors and nurses will confront illnesses they shouldn’t be seeing. Hospitals will absorb the strain. Families will bear the consequences of uncertainty that should never have existed.
Kennedy frequently presents himself as an advocate for children and health. But protecting children requires more than questioning authority; it requires responsibility. It requires clear communication, respect for evidence, and a willingness to act decisively in the face of risk. Confusion isn’t empowerment, and skepticism isn’t a substitute for leadership.
Viruses and bacteria don’t respond to debate. They exploit hesitation and mistrust. History makes this painfully clear: Public health failures occur not because science is wrong, but because leaders choose not to rely on it.
RFK Jr.’s tenure at HHS is already reshaping how Americans think about health guidance at a time when trust is fragile and the stakes are high. The likely outcomes — more preventable illness, more avoidable death and deeper public confusion — aren’t matters of opinion. They are the foreseeable results of weakening the bond between science and policy.
Government has many responsibilities, but one should be beyond dispute: to protect the public using the best knowledge available. Anything less risks turning one of the nation’s most important health institutions into something it was never meant to be — an experiment whose costs are paid in human lives.
Michael Blitz is professor emeritus of interdisciplinary studies at the City University of New York’s John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
