Archives for category: Science

At the blog called “Wonkette,” a writer called “Doctor Zoom” described the Trump administration’s determination to ignore climate science. Apparently, the “golden age” of our nation was the 1950s, before most people had given any thought to the environment and to the human role in fouling the air and the waters. Ignorance is bliss when you are ignorant.

Leading the charge to deny climate change and science is Lee Zeldin, the Trump-appointed administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Zeldin was a member of Congress who represented the East End of Long Island, an environmentally fragile area that is constantly threatened by climate change–beach erosion as water levels rise, the die-off of lobsters and scallops due to pollution and the warming of the seas. He should know better, but loyalty to Trump matters more to him than the damage suffered daily by his former district.

Doktor Zoom writes:

The Trump administration appears to be ready to take another wrecking ball to climate science, according to a report in the Washington Post Wednesday (Internet Archive link). EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, acting on yet another of Trump’s first-day executive orders, “has privately urged the White House to strike down a scientific finding underpinning much of the federal government’s push to combat climate change, according to three people briefed on the matter,” who were all not named because they aren’t authorized to say what’s going on in the Fascism Factory. 

Zeldin wants Trump to do away with the agency’s 2009 “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gases are a threat to public health, an official statement of widely held scientific consensus that underpins the EPA’s ability to regulate carbon dioxide, methane, and other planet warming gases under the Clean Air Act. It’s kind of a big deal, and wiping it away is just one more step in the administration’s agenda of replacing science with far-Right ideology that removes legal constraints on fossil fuel use. 

The original 2009 finding was based on over 100 peer reviewed scientific papers on climate change, involved the work of hundreds of scientists, and included over 500 pages of public comment. It came in response to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that determined that CO2 and other greenhouse gases are “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act; that ruling directed GW Bush’s EPA to stop fucking around and make a formal determination as to whether greenhouse gases endanger human health or welfare. Bush’s EPA finished its assessment in 2007, determining that yes indeedy, greenhouse gases are not healthy for children or other living things. 

Notoriously, however, Bush’s Office of Management and Budget refused to open the email with the EPA finding, leaving it to whoever won the 2008 presidential election. We shit you not! 

Barack Obama’s administration did its own version of the “endangerment finding,” which went through all the proper rule-making processes, and that’s the one that Zeldin’s EPA wants to undo. Eventually, the 28-page Bush EPA finding was also released in response to a public records request; at the time, an Obama EPA spokesperson said the earlier document “demonstrates that in 2007 the science was as clear as it is today.”

But three months ago, thanks to a narrow plurality of votes, science suddenly became totally different, because Trump and his crowd say it is. Isn’t science amazing?

As the Post explains, Trump’s executive order told the EPA to review the 

“legality and continuing applicability of” the endangerment finding. The order gave Zeldin 30 days to submit recommendations to Russell Vought, the head of the White House budget office.

And you can just bet that Trump knew exactly what he was ordering! No way some oil lobbyists wrote that EO for him. 

This time out, it appears that the EPA has completed its review and found that greenhouse gases are in fact no big deal, but we won’t see the finding until the administration is good and ready. EPA spokesperson Molly Vaseliou didn’t offer any comment to the Post either, simply saying in an email that “EPA is in compliance with this aspect of the President’s Executive Order.”

We bet once it’s released, it’ll be backed up by some very compelling science, like calling climate change a Marxist plot to destroy American prosperity. Those three anonymous insiders say that the effort to undo the endangerment finding has been getting advice from “Mandy Gunasekara, who served as EPA chief of staff at the end of Trump’s first term and wrote the EPA chapter in the conservative blueprint Project 2025,” and that’s probably all the science necessary. Gunasekara is so good at science that she’s not only a climate and energy expert, she also moonlights as an expert for Republican congressional hearings on how woke corporations are turning children transgender, so how’s that for a broad range of expertise? Yes, we know: You were told there’d be no polymaths.

Haha, we are kidding! In fact, Ms. Gunasekara probably knows less about climate science — or any science — than the average blogger, because she is not a scientist at all, but a paid liar about science. She has an undergrad degree in communication and media studies, and a law degree from U of Mississippi, and that’s enough to have gotten her quite a few jobs lobbying against science and praising the poor victimized oil industry. 

One of her early jobs was as an aide to the late Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma); Gunasekara was the lucky staffer who got to hand him the very snowball that he tossed on the Senate floorin 2015 to prove there’s no such thing as global warming. 

That was a decade ago, and despite that demonstration, the planet has just kept getting hotter. That’s the thing about science: It’s true even if you don’t believe it. It’s true even if it leads to conclusions that might hurt oil industry profits. It will keep being true even when (we could say “if,” but come on) the EPA proclaims that greenhouse gases do not endanger humans and that Donald Trump is wearing a fine new suit of clothes that only smart people can see. 

Needless to say, climate advocates aren’t planning to let Mad King Donald redefine greenhouse gases as Our Industrious Friends, even if his uncle was a professor at MIT and he has a “natural instinct for science.” David Doniger, an attorney and senior strategist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, told the Washington Post that if Trump’s EPA “proceeds down this path and jettisons the obvious finding that climate change is a threat to our health and welfare,” well then, “We will see them in court.”

And even if the Supreme Court somehow decides science isn’t real and that a president has the power to nullify it, setting back the fight against climate change for as long as he holds power and making America a pariah nation, we can still point to the evidence — the rest of the world will keep it — and say, “And yet it warms.”

Mercedes Schneider writes about a remarkable decision by Louisiana’s top health official.

He has decided that getting vaccinated should be a personal decision, not a mandate that applies to everyone. It’s not possible to stop the spread of a highly contagious disease if vaccination is optional.

Please open the link to read the order of the Louisiana Surgeon General.

A lot of people, mainly children, will get seriously ill, and some will die, because of this idiocy.

Schneider writes:

If it were only that easy:

Do you want to contract polio? Measles? Smallpox? 

No?

Well, now it is only a matter of personal choice: Just say you don’t want a disease, and you will not catch a disease.

Of course, that’s not how it works. If it did– if one’s “personal choice” could prevent disease, especially disease epidemic– then count me in. I really don’t care for shots, anyway.

But you know what I like less that those shots?

The diseases themselves.

When I enrolled in my masters program at West Georgia in 1995, I received a letter stating that I needed to have a booster of the MMR (measles mumps rubella) vaccination since my first shot in that two-shot series occured before I was a year old (I was 10 months old at the time).

So, I went to the health clinic where I received my childhood vaccinations, and I received the booster.

While I was there, the nurse asked if I wanted to also have a tetanus shot, as I had not had one for 10 years.

I remember that shot making my arm ache. I replied, “I hate that shot.”

Without missing a beat, and dryly-stated, she responded, “You would like lockjaw even worse.”

Indeed I would. And so, I also received a tetanus booster.

If you want the benefit of disease protection without incurring the full wrath of a disease, the prophylactic properties of unvaccinated personal choice fall far short.

Nevertheless, in the name of “personal choice,” the Louisiana surgeon general has decided that the Louisiana Department of Health (LDH) will no longer promote vaccinations, as Contagion Live reports on February 16, 2025:

The Louisiana Surgeon General, Ralph Abraham, MD, is advocating for autonomy over one’s body and that the Louisiana Department of Health (LDH) will no longer be publicly promoting vaccination, but rather saying it is a discussion between people and their providers. Abraham told the LDH staff to not encourage vaccines, and LDH will no longer have vaccination events, according to a memo sent late last week (see below).

“The State of Louisiana and LDH have historically promoted vaccines for vaccine preventable illnesses through our parish health units (PHUs), community health fairs, partnerships and media campaigns. While we encourage each patient to discuss the risks and benefits of vaccination with their provider, LDH will no longer promote mass vaccination,” Abraham wrote in the memo.

So, no campaign to stop outbreaks from happening, but Louisiana will promote vaccination once there is an outbreak.

If I have an outbreak of measles, there is no longer a vaccination option for me to prevent it. I just need to plug it out. By the way, at 57 years old, I now fall into the category of people likely to experience complications, including pneumonia and encephalitis (I.e;. brain swelling, whereby “most people require hospitalization so they can receive intensive treatment, including life support.”)

However, I am vaccinated against measles, so the odds are pretty slim (3 in 100).

Speaking of measles, the personal choice prophylactic is currently falling short in neighboring Texas, where NBC News reportsthat by February 14, 2025, 49 cases had been confirmed in rural West Texas:

On Friday, the number of confirmed cases rose to 49, up from 24 earlier in the week, the state health department said. The majority of those cases are in Gaines County, which borders New Mexico.

Most cases are in school-age kids, and 13 have been hospitalized. All are unvaccinated against measles, which is one of the most contagious viruses in the world.

The latest measles case count likely represents a fraction of the true number of infections. Health officials — who are scrambling to get a handle on the vaccine-preventable outbreak — suspect 200 to 300 people in West Texas are infected but untested, and therefore not part of the state’s official tally so far.

The fast-moving outbreak comes as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. takes the helm of the Department of Health and Human Services. Kennedy, a vaccine skeptic, has long sown distrust about childhood vaccines, and in particular, the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, falsely linking it to autism.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention can only send in its experts to assist if the state requests help. So far, Texas has not done so, the CDC said.

The CDC has sent approximately 2,000 doses of the MMR vaccine to Texas health officials at their request. However, most doses so far are being accepted by partially vaccinated kids to boost their immunity, rather than the unvaccinated.

Without widespread vaccination, experts say, the outbreak could go on for months.

Seems like a good time to promote measles vaccination in Louisiana.

Nah. Let’s just wait until the outbreak finds its way to East Texas then crosses the state line.

I borrowed this from Andrea Junker at BlueSky:

DISEASES ERADICATED OR DECIMATED BY SCIENCE:

  1. Chickenpox
  2. Diphtheria
  3. Measles
  4. Pertussis
  5. Pneumococcal Infection
  6. Polio
  7. Tetanus
  8. Typhoid
  9. Yellow Fever
  10. Smallpox

DISEASES ERADICATED OR DECIMATED BY RFK JR. OR PRAYER:
1.


    1. 4.
      5.
      6.
      7.
      8.
      9.

Many federal government websites went dark after Trump took office. Medical and scientific professionals were concerned when websites containing research were shut down. One reason for the lights out was the Trump administration’s determination to remove any research that contained language that referred to diversity, equity or inclusion and any research that related to sexuality, especially references to transgender or bisexual or any LGBT issues. The Trump administration has stated that there are only two genders–male and female–and that’s it.

The news was reported by The Washington Post:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed or edited references to transgender people, gender identity and equity from its website Friday, racing to meet a late-afternoon deadline imposed by the federal Office of Personnel Management.

Whole pages about HIV testing for transgender people, guidelines for use of HIV medication and information on supporting LGBTQ+ youth health were no longer available late Friday. The page that lists vaccines recommended by the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee was also no longer available. The vaccine to protect against mpox virus is recommended for groups including transgender, nonbinary or gender-diverse people.

By Saturday, the page of vaccine-specific recommendations was back online, with no mention of the mpox vaccine.

The blog Inside Medicine reported on the pall of censorship by the feds across the scientific community. Its report included the words that triggered the DEI censors.

In the order, CDC researchers were instructed to remove references to or mentions of a list of forbidden terms: “Gender, transgender, pregnant person, pregnant people, LGBT, transsexual, non-binary, nonbinary, assigned male at birth, assigned female at birth, biologically male, biologically female,” according to an email sent to CDC employees (see below).”

A screenshot of a CDC email shared with Inside Medicine of a list of terms that must be removed from any CDC-authored manuscript being seriously considered or “in press” (but not yet online or in print) at any medical or scientific journal.

An expansion of an emerging censorship regime at the CDC. 

The policy goes beyond the previously reported pause of the CDC’s own publications, including Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), which has seen two issues go unreleased since January 16, marking the first publication gap of any kind in approximately 60 years. Emerging infectious Diseases and Preventing Chronic Disease, the CDC’s other major publications, also remain under lock and key, but have not yet been affected because they are monthly releases and both were released as scheduled in January, prior to President Trump’s inauguration. The policy also goes beyond the general communications gag order that already prevents any CDC scientist from submitting any new scientific findings to the public.

The National Science Foundation was directed to screen papers submitted for funding; it uses a list of words to flag papers that might offend the new administration.Being flagged means that the research needs a closer review to be sure that the topic is inoffensive.

Here is the NSF list:

Judd Legum and Rebecca Crosby of the blog “Popular Information” reported on censorship at the National Secutity Agency.

They wrote:

A memo distributed by NSA leadership to its staff says that on February 10, all NSA websites and internal network pages that contain banned words will be deleted. This is the list of 27 banned words distributed to NSA staff:

Anti-Racism
Racism
Allyship
Bias
DEI
Diversity
Diverse
Confirmation Bias
Equity
Equitableness
Feminism
Gender
Gender Identity
Inclusion
Inclusive
All-Inclusive
Inclusivity
Injustice
Intersectionality
Prejudice
Privilege
Racial Identity
Sexuality
Stereotypes
Pronouns
Transgender
Equality

The memo acknowledges that the list includes many terms that are used by the NSA in contexts that have nothing to do with DEI. For example, the term “privilege” is used by the NSA in the context of “privilege escalation.” In the intelligence world, privilege escalation refers to “techniques that adversaries use to gain higher-level permissions on a system or network.”

Heather Cox Richardson points out that Trump’s desire to cut the federal budgets threatens to undermine cancer research. Cutting cancer research? Yes. Is cancer research a “Marxist radical lunatic” or DEI activity?

Cancer research is important for all of us, regardless of our political views, or lack thereof. Why in the world would Trump want to cut its funding?

Yesterday the National Institutes of Health under the Trump administration announced a new policy that will dramatically change the way the United States funds medical research. Now, when a researcher working at a university receives a federal grant for research, that money includes funds to maintain equipment and facilities and to pay support staff that keep labs functioning. That indirect funding is built into university budgets for funding expensive research labs, and last year reached about 26% of the grant money distributed. Going forward, the administration says it will cap the permitted amount of indirect funding at 15%.

NIH is the nation’s primary agency for research in medicine, health, and behavior. NIH grants are fiercely competitive; only about 20% of applications succeed. When a researcher applies for one, their proposal is evaluated first by a panel of their scholarly peers and then, if it passes that level, an advisory council, which might ask for more information before awarding a grant. Once awarded and accepted, an NIH grant carries strict requirements for reporting and auditing, as well as record retention.

In 2023, NIH distributed about $35 billion through about 50,000 grants to over 300,000 researchers at universities, medical schools, and other research institutions. Every dollar of NIH funding generated about $2.46 in economic activity. For every $100 million of funding, research supported by NIH generates 76 patents, which produce 20% more economic value than other U.S. patents and create opportunities for about $600 million in future research and development.

As Christina Jewett and Sheryl Gay Stolberg of the New York Times explained, the authors of Project 2025 called for the cuts outlined in the new policy, claiming those cuts would “reduce federal taxpayer subsidization of leftist agendas.” Dr. David A. Baltrus of the University of Arizona told Jewett and Stolberg that the new policy is “going to destroy research universities in the short term, and I don’t know after that. They rely on the money. They budget for the money. The universities were making decisions expecting the money to be there.”

Although Baltrus works in agricultural research, focusing on keeping E. coli bacteria out of crops like sprouts and lettuce, cancer research is the top area in which NIH grants are awarded.

Anthropologist Erin Kane figured out what the new NIH policy would mean for states by looking at institutions that received more than $10 million in grants in 2024 and figuring out what percentage of their indirect costs would not be eligible for grant money under the new formula. Six schools in New York won $2.4 billion, including $953 million for indirect costs. The new indirect rate would allow only $220 million for overhead, a loss of $723 million.

States across the country will experience significant losses. Eight Florida schools received about $673 million, $231 million for indirect costs. The new indirect rate would limit that funding to $66 million, a loss of $165 million. Six schools in Ohio received a total of about $700 million; they would lose $194 million. Four schools in Missouri received a total of about $830 million; they would lose $212 million.

One of the sure signs of an authoritarian regime is a passion to censor unwanted information, research, ideas, and history. The Trump administration is busy deleting scientific research at the Centers for Disease Control. Any studies that include data about LGBT+ people, women, or others whose existence is anathema to Trump and his Merry Band of Bigots is being purged. During the first Trump term, research about climate change was given the heave-ho, and scientists rushed to archive their work. Again, climate change is being buried in the archives of the EPA. Now the new Enemy of the State is DEI.

The Washington Post wrote about the censorship at the CDC here:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed or edited references to transgender people, gender identity and equity from its website Friday, racing to meet a late-afternoon deadline imposed by the federal Office of Personnel Management.

Whole pages about HIV testing for transgender people, guidelines for use of HIV medication and information on supporting LGBTQ+ youth health were no longer available late Friday.
The material removed or edited includes extensive sets of data collected and used by researchers around the world, according to two employees who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation. The data’s removal will have implications for researchers who have relied for decades on the comprehensive material collected by the vaunted public health agency.

One example of a set of data taken down was a survey by the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, conducted every two years to assess the health behaviors of high school students. The landing page for data about the survey was dark Friday afternoon and read: “The page you’re looking for was not found…”

Agency staff members were given a list of about 20 words and phrases to be used as a “guide,” according to a screenshot shared by one employee. The words include: gender, transgender, pregnant person, pregnant people, LGBT, transsexual, nonbinary, assigned male at birth, biologically male, biologically female, he/she/they/them. All references to DEI and inclusion are also to be removed.

The new regime is moving fast to obliterate inconvenient science writes TCinLA at his Substack blog, which is called “That’s Another Fine Mess.”

There is a scene toward the end of Act Two in “Rollerball” (the first release, starring James Caan, the one worth watching) in which “Jonathan E” is allowed to go to Geneva, where the computer that runs the world is housed, to ask questions of it. He finds that the computer is systematically “losing” history and data. The Librarian tells him that “He’s already lost the entire Twelfth Century.” Jonathan E realizes that there will never be a way to rebel against the corporate overlords who run the world in which he lives, because the people will never know any other alternative.

Or as George Orwell put it in “1984″: “Who controls the past, controls the future; who controls the present, controls the past.” In that novel – which it seems some people are adapting now as a user’s manual – the information Big Brother’s government didn’t want people to access ended up in “the memory hole.”

As bad as we thought things would be with the second coming of Cletus J. Dumbass’s Maladministration, the reality is far worse. We are only at day 12 of this maladministration, and the assault on historical knowledge and information is well underway.

The Theocrats who created Project 2025 know what Orwell knew, what the screenwriter of Rollerball knew, what those who study authoritarian movements know: if people do not have access to information, they have no way to separate lies from truth. They can then be ruled without fear of revolt.

Information at the Centers for Disease Control is disappearing as you read this. The agency has already removed all scientific data from public view.

On Thursday night, word began to spread through the scientific community that researchers should go to the CDC website and download their data immediately, because such data was about to disappear from the website, or be altered to comply with Maladministration II’s ongoing plan to remove from federal agencies any mention of gender, DEI, or accessibility. Scientists were up throughout the night, working to download information they needed for their continued work on such crucial issues as tracking viral outbreaks. (Remember back in 2020, at the outbreak of the pandemic, when Cletus said he wished they would stop testing people and reporting the results because “It doesn’t look so good for me”?)

Already, the data from the CDC’s Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System has disappeared. The data from the Agency for Toxic Substances and the Disease Registry’s Social Vulnerability Index and the Environmental Justice Index are gone. The landing page for HIV data has vanished. The AtlasPlus tool, which holds 20 years of CDC surveillance data on HIV, hepatitis, sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis, is no longer available. The new “leaders” at the CDC have directed employees to scrub any mention of “gender” from the data it shares at the website, replacing it with “sex.”

The purge’s full scope is still unclear. The Atlantic obtained a document that revealed the government – as of Thursday evening – planned to target and replace several “suggested keywords” – including “pregnant people,” “transgender,” “binary,” “non-binary,” “gender,” “assigned at birth,” “cisgender,” “queer,” “gender identity,” “gender minority,” and “anything with pronouns” These terms represent demographic variables researchers collect when tracking the ebb and flow of diseases and health conditions across populations. If they are reworded, or even removed entirely from data sets to comply with the Executive Order issued the night of Enshittification Day, researchers and health-care providers will have a much harder time figuring out how diseases affect specific communities.

The legislative “explicit purpose” of CDC data is to guide researchers to places and people who most need attention. It is hard to understand how this decision benefits health, but it does benefit an ideological decision to delete the entire topic of transgender.

When questioned about this today, an HHS spokesperson said that “all changes to the HHS website and HHS division websites are in accordance with President Trump’s January 20 Executive Orders” on gender and DEI.

The government understands these changes could have scientific implications since the document directing a review of CDC content suggests some work could be altered without “changing the meaning or scientific integrity of the content;” any such changes should be considered “routine.” Changing other content, would require review by an expert since any alterations would risk scientific integrity.

However, the document does not specify how data would be sorted into the two categories, or who would make such decisions.

The fear among researchers is that entire data sets could be taken down, reappearing with demographic variables removed or altered to conform with the DEI restrictions, losing entire sections of data. Since the Executive Order defines sex as binary, this means transgender people and nonbinary people could be erased. Such data could include facts such as gay men have higher rates of STIs, but lower rates of obesity and that transgender women have higher rates of HIV, but lower rates of prostate cancer, or how various demographic subsets of Americans are most at risk from conditions including adolescent depression, STIs, and sex-specific cancers

At this time, groups of researchers are rushing to archive the CDC website in full.
An example of what is at stake: Mpox – popularly known as “Monkey Pox” – affects people differently, with men who have sex with men being the primary group likely to be infected with the disease. Possessing that knowledge allowed medical authorities to more efficiently allocate resources, including vaccines, bringing the epidemic under control before it affected Americans more widely.

Scrubbing data such as this would change how the government allocates funds for long-standing threats to public health; this will widen health-equity gaps, or reverse progress in combating such diseases. The rates of STIs have recently started to plateau in the U.S., after decades of steady increase. Altering data that focus interventions on transgender populations, or men who have sex with men, would undo those gains. If there is no data to prove a health issue is concentrated in a particular community, that gives the government justification to cut funding.
Since much of the data on the CDC website comes from states, once it becomes known this data-scrubbing is happening, some states (blue states) may become reluctant to share information with the federal government while other states (red states) might not collect that important information at all. This would make what information the government does have unreliable, creating a skewed picture of reality.

It is shocking to realize how Project 2025 amounts to a war against modern society. Those reading this who are older than 75 can remember what life was like without the polio vaccine, without the measles and mumps vaccines. I escaped polio, but I came down with both measles and mumps before age 5, and I can still remember how difficult dealing with those was. The only thing I can compare those events to was coming down with COVID two years ago, which I survived only because I immediately obtained Paclovid for early treatment. Knowing to do that was because information about the disease and its effect on older people was made public by the CDC. Without that information, I and a lot of other older people who came down with COVID then would literally not be here now.

Maladministration II has to be seen as the all-out attack on modern society that it is. It has to be opposed by all means available. These Enemies of America are a minority. Every poll shows that significant majorities – over 66% – of Americans oppose every single action Project 2025 plans to take in this assault.

I admit that in my wildest nightmares of this coming to pass, I didn’t think of such things as an all-out attack on modern science, as is happening now. But this clearly demonstrates the nature of the threat we face. They are The Enemy. In all things, in all ways.

Winston Churchill warned his people in a speech given on June 18, 1940 that they were threatened by “a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.” We actually face that situation now.

The one fortunate thing is that, so far, the enemy has proven themselves largely incompetent to carry out successfully their plans to destroy modern civilization. That doesn’t make them less dangerous, but we can resist them.

We have to.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., one of the most famous vaccine skeptics in the U.S., tried to distance himself from his decades of anti-vaccine sentiment during his Jan. 29 hearing to be confirmed as secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). If confirmed, Kennedy would oversee agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health.

“News reports have claimed that I am anti-vaccine or anti-industry. I am neither. I am pro-safety,” Kennedy said in his opening statement before the Senate Committee on Finance, prompting a protester to shout, “He lies!” Kennedy added that all of his children are vaccinated—a decision he has previously said he regrets—and said vaccines “play a critical role in health care.”

Some Republican senators accepted Kennedy’s pro-vaccine comments at the hearing. But many senators—including Oregon’s Ron Wyden, a Democrat—pressed Kennedy on discrepancies between his past public statements—in which he has repeatedly questioned the safety and necessity of vaccines and said they are linked to autism and chronic diseases—and his sanitized comments during the hearing. “Mr. Kennedy, all of these

Christina Jewett wrote in The New York Times that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tried to block the release of all COVID vaccines in 2121, at the height of the pandemic.

In the past, I have referred to Mr. Kennedy as a crackpot. I was wrong. He’s more than a crackpot. He’s a dangerous man, whose non-scientific ideology has the potential to kill thousands of people. He should not be confirmed as Secretary of Health and Human Services. His views are lethal. If a new form of COVID or some other contagious disease were to emerge, we would all be in danger.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President-elect Donald J. Trump’s choice to lead the nation’s health agencies, formally asked the Food and Drug Administration to revoke the authorization of all Covid vaccines during a deadly phase of the pandemic when thousands of Americans were still dying every week.

Mr. Kennedy filed a petition with the F.D.A. in May 2021 demanding that officials rescind authorization for the shots and refrain from approving any Covid vaccine in the future.

Just six months earlier, Mr. Trump had declared the Covid vaccines a miracle. At the time Mr. Kennedy filed the petition, half of American adults were receiving their shots. Schools were reopening and churches were filling.

Estimates had begun to show that the rapid rollout of Covid vaccines had already saved about 140,000 lives in the United States.

The petition was filed on behalf of the nonprofit that Mr. Kennedy founded and led, Children’s Health Defense. It claimed that the risks of the vaccines outweighed the benefits and that the vaccines weren’t necessary because good treatments were available, including ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which had already been deemedineffective against the virus.

Alexandra Petri is the resident humorist at The Washington Post. She has the knack of taking wacky ideas in the world of politics and exposing them as bizarre. In this post, she shows the absurdity of sanewashing extremism in the guise of finding a “middle ground” with crackpot ideas. The “middle ground,” she cautions, may actually mean “giving ground” to very bad and deadly ideas. Sometimes there is no middle ground between a good idea and a dangerous idea.

She writes:

“As a Democratic member of Congress, I know my party will be tempted to hold fast against Mr. Trump at every turn: uniting against his bills, blocking his nominees and grinding the machinery of the House and the Senate to a halt. That would be a mistake. Only by working together to find compromise on parts of the president-elect’s agenda can we make progress for Americans who are clearly demanding change in the economy, immigration, crime and other top issues.”

— “Let’s Try Something Different in How We Deal With Trump,” Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-New York), in a New York Times op-ed


Look, some people are still naive enough to believe that polio is, for lack of a better word, “bad.” And recent signs haven’t been encouraging! It seems like the disease wants to do exactly what it did last time: cripple children and put them in iron lungs. But what if instead of fighting it, we … didn’t?

When I look at how people voted this election, I am forced to conclude: Some of you want polio. Who am I to stand against that desire? Someone with values?

Do I think polio is good? No! Of course not. But some people do, and I just think it would be a mistake not to give them the opportunity to set the course of vaccine policy for the next four years. Which, again, isn’t what I want. But compromise is important. That was why people voted for me, someone who said he didn’t like polio, so that I could surprise them by wanting to hear polio out. That’s just good politics.

It’s not only polio. Everywhere you look, there are battles that once felt existentially important in which you can just surrender, as I’m sure Donald Trump is eager to tell Ukraine. And I am ready to start doing that work — first on polio, then on everything else.

Listen, I’m not naive. I know that every indication so far has been that only one side is willing to compromise on anything. That gives us bargaining power! Or is it the other side that gets the bargaining power … ? Hang on, let me go look this up. This feels important to get right! Well, let me keep going with my argument, but I will come back and look this up. Don’t let me forget!

Where was I? Right: Having core values means that sometimes you have to stand up for them, even when it feels like an uphill battle. For instance, the belief that trans people deserve protection from those who would legislate them out of public spaces and eliminate their right to medical self-determination — a bottom line that I would never budge on, except to completely throw away that principle if I ever decide it’s politically expedient. Which I think I might just have done! Whoops!

But, hey, that’s what principles are: inconvenient. Except for my bedrock principle: that those who want the opposite of what I stand for and who refuse to work with me on any issue probably know something that I don’t, and I should listen to them. That I will never abandon.

When I see someone who wants to put polio back on the map, I just see one more opportunity for compromise. Why, if enough of us say, “You know what, in all that ranting about fluoride, I heard one word that made a kind of sense! Say more! I bet we can find common ground!” maybe the other side will stop believing what they believe and change their entire worldview! Isn’t that what happened to Scrooge? It’s not? Well, never mind.

If I just listen hard enough and agree to find common ground, I am certain the other party will be the one to change. That’s usually what makes people change: when you give up defending your position completely! Then they budge. I hope! That’s certainly what I’m counting on for the next four-plus years!

When I read the sentence “Unless enough people find the spine to oppose his appointment, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will soon be in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services,” what I see is not a call to find some spine (impossible) and remind others of the stakes of not doing so. When has anyone found a congressional spine, except RFK Jr. while out on one of his weekly Hikes in Search of Surprising Things to Put Into His Freezer?

No, what that sentence means is: We need to start thinking of ways to compromise now! Compromise public health, compromise public safety, compromise all of our principles! Because that’s what the country needs: more things to be compromised.

And I, for one, am excited.

Gabriel Schoenfeld of The Bulwark cautions us about accommodating or compromising with totally unqualified people nominated by Trump to take prominent roles in crucial federal agencies. He writes specifically about the nomination of Robert Kennedy Jr. to direct the Department of Health and human Services, as well as Dr. Oz. Apparently, Trump offered him this role in return for his endorsement but it’s important to oppose this nomination, not accept it, because RFK is not only totally unqualified but dangerous due to his ignorance and his embrace of discredited ideas.

Schoenfeld reminds us of one of the especially sordid chapters in the history of Stalin’s USSR, when crackpot science became state policy and killed millions of people.

He writes:

RATHER THAN OPPOSE DONALD TRUMP’S dangerous nominee for secretary of health and human services, some liberal commentators have suggested that the critics of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. should find ways to accommodate him.

Writing in the New York Times in November, physician Rachael Bedard argued for finding “common ground” with the anti-vaccine ideologue. “We can’t spend four years simply fighting his agenda,” she wrote. Instead, RFK Jr.’s critics should try to “turn his most valid criticisms of the American health care system into constructive reforms.” In a follow-up interview this week, Bedard insists she isn’t “sane-washing” RFK Jr., she just wants to be realistic about recognizing “that he has a growing movement of people behind him, who aren’t just going to go away because we yell at them.”

Meanwhile, Adam Jentleson, a former Democratic congressional staffer—he held prominent jobs under Sens. John Fetterman and Harry Reid—has called for an effort to get RFK Jr. to “bless the next wave of vaccines.” How Jentleson thinks the notorious antivaxxer might be persuaded to perform an about-face is left unstated. Jentleson just wants to “build bridges.”

At a moment when we should be thinking of this nomination in terms of the potential risk to human lives, all this muddled analysis about science and politics calls to mind a grim episode from the last century that is a cautionary tale for today: the career of the Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko.

Born in 1898, Lysenko had accomplishments of great consequence to his name. Most of these occurred in the field of agronomy, where he advanced a revolutionary set of ideas—now known as Lysenkoism. His main contentions were that genes did not exist, that acquired traits could be inherited, and that heredity itself could be altered by “educating” plants.

One such form of education was called “vernalization”—the notion that crop yields would dramatically increase if seeds that usually died in harsh frosts were exposed to lower temperatures before sowing. “Insights” like that, derived ultimately from Marxist ideology instead of legitimate empirical research, were put into practice on a large scale, first in the USSR and then in Communist China. Widespread crop failures followed, and then famines in which millions perished.

Lysenko—a crackpot with the power of the Soviet state behind him—was the recipient of numerous awards, including, on eight occasions, the Order of Lenin, and on three occasions, the Stalin Prize. Lysenko died of natural causes in 1976.

This history of massive state-sponsored scientific fraud is pertinent to Trump’s attempt to install Kennedy to the highest-ranking healthcare position in the U.S. government. The secretary of health and human services has oversight of everything from food safety to medical research to private health insurance to epidemiology to Medicare and Medicaid and much, much more.

Like Lysenko, RFK Jr. has departed from science even as he claims its mantle. He is a proponent of consuming raw milk despite the proven safety benefits of pasteurization (just last month raw milk in California was found to contain bird flu). He opposes the fluoridation of water despite the proven benefits to dental health. But it is for his opposition to vaccines—and his lies about them—that he is most notorious and most dangerous.

Kennedy’s position atop HHS would put him in charge of the Vaccines for Children program. It has saved millions of lives by immunizing children against diseases like polio and measles that, thanks to the vaccines, are now rare. He would also oversee the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which has as one of its most important roles deciding which vaccines health insurers are required to cover.

To be sure, in lobbying for his confirmation Kennedy has said that “We’re not going to take vaccines away from anybody.” He also says he aims to improve the science of vaccine safety and wants nothing more than to provide “good information” so people “can make informed choices.”

But in light of some of his other pronouncements, this is all disingenuous. One piece of his “good information”—repeated in a 2023 interview with Fox News—is that vaccines cause autism. This theory was first popularized by the British doctor Andrew Wakefield in the Lancet in 1998. But Wakefield was discredited and his Lancet paper was retracted because it was fraudulent. Despite numerous studies that have since found no link between vaccines and autism, Kennedy has persisted in trumpeting his view, and gone even further to claim that “no vaccine is safe and effective.” Notably, the lawyer Kennedy selectedto screen candidates for positions at HHS has filed a petition to the Food and Drug Administration to revoke approval of the polio vaccine. On social media, Kennedy has called COVID shots “a crime against humanity.” Estimates are that COVID vaccines have prevented 3.2 million deaths in the United States alone through 2022.

A person with no medical or scientific training, RFK Jr. is evidently unaware that vaccines are one of humanity’s greatest accomplishments. Smallpox, the deadliest disease in human history, has been wiped from the face of the earth. Polio, a scourge that terrified generations of Americans and struck down an American president, has been largely consigned to the dustbin of history, at least in the developed world. Rabies, an invariably fatal disease, is preventable by vaccination (does RFK Jr. want to stop vaccinating Fido as well?). New vaccines can even prevent cancer. This is “good information.”

Even if, unexpectedly, RFK Jr. did absolutely nothing to hinder the development and distribution of vaccines, the mere elevation of someone with such views to a position of national authority would undermine public confidence in vaccines and increase vaccine hesitancy, with severely deleterious consequences for public health. If vaccination rates decline sufficiently, diphtheria, measles, yellow fever, shingles, and many other infectious diseases now relatively dormant may roar back into prominence.


UNFORTUNATELY, RFK JR. IS NOT THE ONLY Lysenko-like figure nominated to serve in the incoming administration. Trump has also tapped MAGA loyalist Dr. Mehmet Oz to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Oz has a long record as a grifter pushing pseudoscience for bucks. Among his claims lacking any scientific backing are that selenium supplements are “the holy grail of cancer prevention”; that raspberry ketones are “the No. 1 miracle in a bottle to burn your fat”; that umckaloabo root extract is “incredibly effective at relieving cold symptoms,” and that hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment for COVID-19. All of this is quackery.

The analogy to Lysenko and Soviet science is not exact, of course. The differences between the totalitarian USSR under Joseph Stalin and the (for now) liberal democratic United States under Donald Trump are too obvious to enumerate. For one thing, a democracy such as ours has self-corrective mechanisms that can set things right. Crackpots like Kennedy and grifters like Oz have to be confirmed by the U.S. Senate—and it is not inconceivable that, even with a Republican majority, their nominations will be shot down. But given how cowed Republican senators are by Donald Trump, it would not be surprising if both are confirmed.

For another thing, Lysenko’s critics were either executed outright or sent to the gulag to die of starvation and overwork. Critics of RFK Jr. and Oz are not likely to suffer a remotely similar fate . . . unless, of course, their name is Dr. Anthony Fauci, who is now being threatened with imprisonment by leading figures in MAGA world, including by RFK Jr. himself. “You should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. You belong in prison, Dr. Fauci,” says Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene. On his X platform, president-elect sidekick Elon Musk has been particularly insistent, tweeting the same message multiple times: “My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci.” The threats are serious enough that President Joe Biden is reportedly considering offering Fauci a preemptive pardon.

Trump has said he has appointed Kennedy to “go wild” on U.S. health. The phrase is well chosen. When it comes to medical care and medical science in the unfolding second Trump administration, we’re entering a wild time and a dark age. Among other things, Trump intends to withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization on his first day in office. The WHO is a flawed international body that badly needs reform—but withdrawal will have potentially catastrophic effects on the battle to contain the next future global epidemic. In the United States and around the world, as happened with COVID, millions could die. We are less than a month away from opening a new chapter of Lysenkoism, American style.