The American medical establishment is understandably terrified at the prospect of one RFK Jr. He plans to fundamentally reshape a key advisory committee that determines whether preventive health treatments—including many important cancer screenings—should be covered. Kennedy’s most controversial move came in June when he fired all 17 members of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) immunization panel. This decision quickly drew the ire of public health experts and advocacy organizations.
The American Public Health Association’s executive director, Georges Benjamin, referred to Kennedy’s actions as “a coup,” highlighting the upheaval within the health advisory structure. The recent proposed changes to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) have set off some alarm bells. This new task force can be pivotal in shaping insurance coverage of these preventive health services. This panel will be made up of a taskforce of 16 members. Appointed by successive Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) secretaries, they have served four-year terms as unpaid, volunteer public servants.
In a recent letter sent to Kennedy, the American Medical Association (AMA) reiterated the need to keep the taskforce’s work free from undue political pressure. Importantly, the AMA underscores that its members go through a clear and public nomination process. Produced by leading experts in primary care, prevention and evidence-based medicine, those reports have garnered tremendous influence. The AMA publicly called on Kennedy to “protect the integrity” of the taskforce as worries about political influence continued to grow.
As the proposed rule stands, a coalition of 104 national public health organizations—including the AMA—has already sounded the alarm. In a letter to the chairs of four different congressional health committees, they implored lawmakers to safeguard the taskforce’s independence. Their letter was right in line with the AMA’s outrageous demand for scientific integrity. They advocated for a more neutral, fact-based approach to health policy.
Kennedy’s own slogan, “Making America healthy again,” juxtaposes sharply with reports of proposed changes that critics argue could compromise preventive health services. The new rural taskforce is on a mission to improve health outcomes and help reduce disease for all Americans. This huge overhaul would have a huge effect on the public interest, but …
Benjamin remarked on the implications of potential changes, stating, “It’s not good for the health of the nation.” What’s most troubling about his comments is the implication of them. Changing the makeup of this advisory body would have monumental consequences for public health.
Criticism has intensified following an article published by the American Conservative earlier this month, which accused the taskforce of being “packed with Biden administration appointees devoted to the ideological capture of medicine.” These allegations have stoked concerns that the Administration’s political agenda would trump scientific findings and public health interests.
Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for HHS, noted that “No final decision has been made on how the USPSTF can better support HHS’ mandate to Make America Healthy Again.” However, this statement implies that conversations are still occurring about the long-term future of the taskforce and how they will operate going forward.
This is symptomatic of a larger trend across his administration. In fact, press reports indicate that Kennedy and his cabinet are responsible for deeply damaging cuts and job losses at every federal agency. This has called into question their bona fides with health.
