Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
77 Nobel Laureates have called on Senate lawmakers to reject President-Elect Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Let’s bring you up to speed: Shortly after President-Elect Trump defeated Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election, President-Elect Trump nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The nomination followed Kennedy’s earlier decision to withdraw from his independent presidential bid to endorse Trump. Both RFK and Trump share a common skepticism toward federal health agencies and a desire to reform institutions they have criticized as being influenced by industry interests. This alignment formed the foundation of their “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement, which advocates for controversial overhauls of public health policies and agencies.
What’s going on now: In a letter to Senate lawmakers, 77 Nobel laureates from disciplines including medicine, chemistry, physics, and economics urged the rejection of Kennedy’s nomination to lead the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), citing his “lack of credentials or relevant experience” and his opposition to foundational public health interventions. The laureates warned that Kennedy’s confirmation would “put the public’s health in jeopardy and undermine America’s global leadership in the health sciences.” They expressed particular alarm over his history of promoting claims linking vaccines to autism and his rejection of evidence showing that HIV causes AIDS.
The signatories included Victor Ambros, who helped discover microRNA, and Harold Varmus, a former director of the National Institutes of Health, who argued that Kennedy’s approach risks undermining the integrity of federal health agencies. Highlighting Kennedy’s aggressive criticism of agencies like the FDA and CDC, the laureates warned that “placing Mr. Kennedy in charge of DHHS would put the public’s health in jeopardy” and urged lawmakers to prioritize the protection of scientific rigor and public health infrastructure.
Another view: Despite the opposition, Kennedy amassed the support of a wide range of Democrats, Independents, and Republicans who argue that an outsider with his track record of challenging entrenched systems is exactly what HHS needs. Supporters say that Kennedy’s legal background, particularly his decades-long career suing major corporations for environmental violations and public health harms, demonstrates his willingness to take on powerful interests to protect everyday Americans. In addition, supporters point out that the US is one of the unhealthiest developed nations in the world, plagued by skyrocketing chronic disease rates, a food system that allows banned chemicals in other countries to be used in everyday products, and regulatory agencies criticized for being too close to industry.
