Mistrust of government didn’t start with Kennedy, nor did vaccine hesitancy or the belief that purer food makes for a cleaner body. These sentiments are widespread among Americans. Some of the questions Kennedy raises about the relationship between regulators and industry, or how various toxic substances are tolerated in soil, air, and food, aren’t actually far-fetched. Just this month, the New England Journal of Medicine published an editorial criticizing the FDA’s lax oversight of food additives. Similarly, while pasteurization as a policy is sound, there are individual circumstances in which consuming raw milk and cheese feels safe and desirable. For example, when purchasing dairy products from well-known farms or while traveling abroad to countries where unpasteurized cheese is sold. .
A functioning public health ecosystem addresses and takes responsibility for these challenges. But accountability and nuance are not what Mr. Kennedy promises his supporters. In his speeches and interviews, public health institutions are described as an unholy alliance of the deep state and corporate raiders, but lack ideas on how to deal with chronic disease, for example. U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg sharply calls Kennedy’s approach to politics “post-policy.” Mr. Kennedy’s platform is who he is, and he positions himself as the only man brave enough to speak truth to power.
This aggression affects the entire discourse. As prominent right-wing figures campaign in defense of raw milk, health authorities are forced to issue defensive recommendations such as “do not consume any raw milk or raw milk products,” but the number of serious illnesses is increasing. This may seem too harsh given the relative scarcity. and deaths from raw dairy products. When Mr. Kennedy’s followers send death threats to Anthony Fauci, his defenders suggest that he should be enshrined as a saint in response. A cottage industry of semi-scientists and influencers on the right and left criticize public health institutions and their associations by maintaining a kind of hysteria about the long tail of the pandemic.
All this is unfortunate. Public health guidance is most effective when it is persuasive rather than prescriptive. Much of the official guidance throughout the coronavirus pandemic has proven flawed in retrospect. Some of those mistakes, such as initially recommending bans on mask-wearing and ignoring the possibility that the virus could be spread through the air, are clear in a time of great uncertainty and turmoil. It was born out of a leader’s urge to appear obvious.
Ideally, the next generation of leaders will be able to strike a different balance. However, in the face of misleading data or malicious attacks, it is difficult to respond with integrity and flexibility. Ironically, Mr. Kennedy’s fanaticism is actually quite malleable. After all, he signed on for the former president’s campaign whose biggest accomplishment was Operation Warp Speed, which brought a coronavirus vaccine within a year. Donald Trump doesn’t like to talk about his accomplishments anymore, but Kennedy plans to ignore that. Instead, both decide to play on their home turf, while at the same time deftly provoking their opponents to respond with caricatures of themselves.
