Donald Trump has promised to give Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a prominent role in his administration’s health sector should he win the presidency, a proposal that has raised alarm among health experts, drugmakers, and public health advocates.
Kennedy, an outspoken vaccine skeptic and conspiracy theorist, ended his independent presidential campaign earlier this year and threw his support behind Trump. Trump has suggested that Kennedy will play a “big role” in shaping healthcare policies during his second term. The former president added that he would let Kennedy take the reins on health, food, and drug regulations, but details about the exact role Kennedy would take remain vague.
The idea of elevating someone like Kennedy—who has no medical or scientific background—into a significant health position has sparked concern across the health community. Critics argue that Kennedy’s stance on vaccines and public health could have far-reaching and potentially dangerous consequences for patients, pharmaceutical companies, and public health in the United States.
Dr. Paul Offit, a vaccine expert at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, voiced his concerns about Kennedy’s involvement in the

Trump administration. Offit, who has been critical of Kennedy’s views, expressed that such an appointment could create “chaos” in health policy. “Things would not be grounded in scientific truth, just grounded in whatever he or his acolytes believe,” Offit told CNBC. “It would be a free-for-all. It would be uncertainty and instability. It would be chaos.”
This potential chaos, according to health experts, could manifest in various forms. Lower vaccination rates, an increase in preventable diseases, and greater public distrust in key federal health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could follow. These challenges are already present in the U.S., which is grappling with declining childhood vaccination rates and higher-than-average rates of chronic disease and maternal mortality compared to other high-income countries.
Kennedy, who is best known for his advocacy against vaccines, has made numerous misleading claims about the safety of vaccines, despite extensive scientific evidence disproving many of his assertions. One of his most notorious falsehoods is the claim that vaccines are linked to autism, a theory debunked by decades of research. Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization, Children’s Health Defense, has become one of the most well-funded anti-vaccine groups in the country, despite its controversial positions.
Kennedy’s views could have significant consequences not just for public health but also for the pharmaceutical industry. U.S. drugmakers like Pfizer and Moderna, which have been recovering from decreased COVID-19 vaccine sales, might face further challenges if Kennedy’s influence were to gain traction. If Kennedy were to take a leadership role in regulating drugs and vaccines, it could disrupt the approval processes that ensure safe and effective treatments. Kennedy has expressed that he would not prioritize vaccine development if faced with another pandemic, a position that many experts believe would delay essential vaccine and treatment advancements.
The pharmaceutical industry, which depends heavily on the federal government for regulatory oversight and funding, could be forced to navigate an environment where health policies are shaped by misinformation and political agendas. For drugmakers, an increase in anti-vaccine rhetoric would likely lead to even lower vaccination rates, which could hurt their bottom lines.
For patients, the consequences could be even more severe. Experts worry that if Kennedy were given a platform to push his anti-vaccine agenda, it could lead to more vaccine-preventable diseases making a resurgence in the U.S., as seen with the decline in routine childhood vaccinations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Diseases such as polio and measles, which were nearly eradicated in the U.S., could reemerge if vaccination rates continue to fall.
Genevieve Kanter, an associate professor at the University of Southern California, warned that promoting Kennedy’s views could normalize vaccine hesitancy, especially among parents. This could lead to even more Americans opting out of vaccines, putting their children and the broader community at risk. “I think we could reasonably predict that there would be a decline in vaccination rates among children, and perhaps vaccination overall,” Kanter said.
Even if Kennedy does not formally hold a high-level position within federal health agencies like the FDA or the CDC, his influence could still pose significant risks. The possibility of Kennedy holding a “health czar” position at the White House, a role that would not require Senate confirmation, could give him a national platform to spread his views on health and vaccines. Drew Altman, president and CEO of the health policy organization KFF, stated that elevating Kennedy would give him “a national podium backed by the president,” allowing him to reach more people who may believe and act on his misleading claims.
The effects of such an appointment could be particularly damaging for the pharmaceutical industry. Drugmakers like Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson depend on the government to approve their vaccines and treatments and ensure that they are distributed effectively. With a prominent figure like Kennedy at the helm of health policy, pharmaceutical companies could face increased scrutiny and uncertainty. If Kennedy pushes his anti-vaccine narrative, it could further reduce public confidence in vaccines, affecting not just COVID-19 shots, but vaccines for diseases like the flu, measles, and others.
Kennedy’s influence could also impact the government’s response to future public health crises. In previous interviews, Kennedy has stated that vaccines have caused more harm than good, a claim that contradicts the scientific consensus. In the event of a future pandemic, Kennedy’s stance could hinder efforts to develop and distribute life-saving vaccines. The public health community relies on science-based policies to respond to pandemics quickly and effectively, and Kennedy’s views are often at odds with the established scientific approach.
Despite the controversy surrounding Kennedy’s views, it’s unclear whether he will secure a formal position within the Trump administration. High-level roles at agencies like the FDA and CDC require Senate confirmation, which may pose a significant hurdle. However, given Kennedy’s close relationship with Trump and his potential to influence health policy in other ways, experts fear that his impact on public health could be significant, even without a formal role.
Overall, the prospect of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. playing a key role in shaping U.S. health policy under a Trump presidency is raising serious concerns about the future of public health. From vaccine hesitancy to regulatory uncertainty, his influence could have a lasting impact on both the pharmaceutical industry and patient health outcomes across the country. While Trump’s supporters may embrace Kennedy’s views, health experts warn that his anti-science rhetoric could set back years of progress in improving public health in the U.S.