Category: Anti-Science

CDC Director Monarez Ousted After Refusing RFK Jr.’s Quack Conspiracies

Dr. Susan Monarez has been abruptly removed from her role as director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a decision made by the Biden administration amid significant instability within the agency. This leadership shakeup follows a violent incident on the CDC’s Atlanta campus and coincides with a mass resignation of several high-ranking officials, leaving the CDC without clear guidance at a critical moment for public health.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has not appointed an interim director following Monarez’s departure, which came only weeks after her swearing-in on July 31. Reports indicate that internal pressure from HHS and conflicts over vaccine policy led to her ousting. Monarez’s refusal to dismiss veteran individuals from the CDC whom HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. targeted further fueled the tension that resulted in her termination.

Monarez’s handling of vaccine policies reportedly clashed with the sentiments of Kennedy, who has faced accusations of politicizing public health. The dismissal is seen by her attorneys and supporters as a dangerous move toward the suppression of scientific guidance within the CDC and a step backwards in public health efforts at a time when vaccines are more critical than ever.

Following her removal, three additional senior officials also resigned, highlighting a collapse of morale within the CDC and concerns about the politicization of health information. These officials expressed that the integrity of the CDC and the safety of public health are at risk due to current leadership decisions that embrace disinformation over science.

The broader implications of this upheaval point toward a systematic degradation of public health institutions under the influence of a more politically charged agenda, threatening the nation’s health security. Experts warn that this event could undermine trust in crucial health guidance, potentially exacerbating threats like pandemics and public health crises in the future.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/27/health/cdc-director-monarez)

Trump Administration Cuts $500 Million in Vital mRNA Vaccine Funding

The Trump administration’s recent decision to terminate contracts worth nearly $500 million focused on developing mRNA vaccines has alarmed public health experts and scientists alike. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the move, which halts vital research into a technology that has proven essential during the COVID-19 pandemic. Critics assert this represents a significant setback in the fight against infectious diseases, potentially compromising public health preparedness for future outbreaks.

Rick Bright, former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), criticized the cuts, warning that dismantling mRNA development now could exacerbate risks for Americans during future health crises. Scientists emphasize that the rapid advancements seen with COVID-19 vaccines highlight the necessity of mRNA technology as a tool for evolving medical challenges.

Kennedy claimed his department is moving “beyond the limitations of mRNA” after consultations with experts, asserting that mRNA technology poses greater risks than benefits. However, many in the scientific community dispute this claim, arguing that mRNA vaccines are crucial for timely updates against emerging viral threats. Experts emphasize that the move contradicts the overwhelming evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccines, which have saved countless lives.

The announcement signals a troubling continuation of Kennedy’s anti-vaccine agenda. His administration’s actions could dismantle critical support for vaccine initiatives, particularly those targeting vulnerable populations. Supporting groups like Children’s Health Defense, Kennedy’s approach seems more focused on ideological beliefs than the best interests of public health, as indicated by numerous studies attesting to the safety of vaccines.

With mounting evidence of Kennedy’s anti-science rhetoric, experts have reiterated the importance of mRNA technology. They argue that halting such research undermines decades of progress in vaccine development and preparedness. By redirecting funding towards less-researched vaccine platforms, the administration risks public trust in health initiatives and potentially endangers lives as it prepares for the next health crisis.

(h/t: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/rfk-jr-cuts-500-million-mrna-vaccine-contracts-dealing-major-blow-prom-rcna223281)

NASA Cuts Over 20% Workforce Amid Trump’s Large Budget Slash

NASA is undertaking significant workforce reductions, with plans to cut over 20% of its staff in alignment with President Trump’s strategy to downsize the federal government. Nearly 4,000 employees have opted to leave the agency, responding to a deferred resignation program that closed its application window recently. This mass departure will reduce NASA’s workforce from approximately 18,000 to around 14,000.

The downsizing includes about 870 employees who applied in the initial round, along with an additional 3,000 in the second round. This reduction, exacerbated by the 500 workers lost through normal attrition, poses serious challenges to NASA’s operational capabilities. Workers have expressed concerns that these cuts threaten safety, scientific progress, and the effective use of public resources.

A budget proposal from the Trump administration threatens to decrease NASA’s overall budget by 24%, reducing it from $24 billion to $18 billion. Over 360 NASA employees have publicly urged against these proposed cuts, stating they are arbitrary and disregard established congressional appropriations laws. Their letter highlights the potential “dire” consequences of these reductions on NASA’s mission.

The initiative to downsize stems from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), created during Trump’s term, aimed at reducing waste and the size of the federal workforce. This plan raises alarms within the scientific community about the potential erosion of decades of progress in research and inclusivity, particularly as funding cuts threaten ongoing missions to the Moon and Mars.

Earlier this year, NASA experienced internal instability as Trump’s initial nominee for NASA administrator, Jared Isaacman, was withdrawn prior to a confirmation vote. Following this setback, Trump appointed Sean Duffy as the interim administrator, a move seen as indicative of Trump’s ongoing efforts to influence NASA’s direction amid substantial operational challenges.

(h/t: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5421675-nasa-workforce-20-percent-cuts/)

NOAA Officials Suspended Amid Trump Administration’s Stranglehold

Recent reports reveal that two senior officials at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Steve Volz and Jeff Dillen, were placed on administrative leave. Both played key roles in the investigation of the controversial “Sharpiegate” incident, where President Trump misleadingly altered a hurricane map to suggest a threat to Alabama.

The decision to remove Volz and Dillen arises amid tensions with the Trump administration. It is suspected that their departure coincides with the upcoming Senate Committee vote on Neil Jacobs, nominated by Trump to lead NOAA. Inquiries into why their leave was timed with this critical moment raise serious questions about integrity and political interference in scientific matters.

A former NOAA employee has noted the questionable timing, suggesting that it appears aimed at silencing those who previously held the administration accountable for altering scientific findings. The NOAA spokesperson cited performance issues for Dillen’s leave and a separate matter for Volz, yet both officials hinted their removals may be strategic to facilitate policies contrary to NOAA’s mission.

Volz’s service history and advocacy for maintaining NOAA’s operational integrity conflict with current administration plans to privatize some of its satellite operations. This privatization is outlined in Project 2025, a Republican initiative advocating for significant changes in NOAA’s operations, hinting at broader GOP strategies to commercialize and undermine scientific integrity in public agencies.

The departure of these officials not only raises concerns about the politicization of NOAA but also reinforces the administration’s pattern of purging those who challenge its directives. As recruiting and maintaining Trump loyalists continues to shape federal agencies, the alarming precedent set here threatens to erode the independence of scientific research and policy-making foundational to American democracy.

(h/t: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/noaa-sharpiegate-investigation-trump-b2796556.html)

Trump Administration Appoints Climate Change Contrarians Undermining Scientific Consensus

The Trump administration has appointed three prominent climate change contrarians to positions within the Department of Energy, raising alarm among scientists and environmental advocates. The appointments include John Christy and Roy Spencer, who have long rejected the scientific consensus on climate change, and Steven E. Koonin, known for questioning mainstream climate science. These hires are part of a broader strategy by the Trump administration, under Secretary Chris Wright, to influence government policy in favor of the fossil fuel industry.

Each appointee brings a history of undermining established climate science. Koonin, who previously served in the Department of Energy during the Obama administration and worked for BP, is known for pushing fringe ideas regarding climate science. Christy and Spencer have questioned the validity of surface temperature data, aligning themselves with a small minority of scientists who downplay the impact of human activity on climate change. The appointments are seen as an attempt to tilt federal research and policy towards contrarian views.

As the Trump administration aims to dismantle existing climate regulations and scientific findings, hiring these contrarians appears to be an effort to produce favorable outcomes for their agenda. Notably, they plan to overturn a critical 2009 finding that recognized greenhouse gas emissions as a threat to public health. This reflects a shifting priority towards protecting corporate interests over public welfare and environmental safety, as evidenced by proposed budget cuts to agencies crucial for climate science.

Concerns have been voiced by leading climate scientists regarding the potential for these appointments to lead to skewed interpretations of climate data, which could result in a misleading version of the National Climate Assessment. Andrew Dessler, a climate scientist at Texas A&M, criticized the administration’s approach, stating that the appointed scientists are selected not for their expertise but for their willingness to provide desired conclusions. This trend signifies a troubling disregard for legitimate scientific inquiry in favor of political objectives.

The ongoing undermining of climate research, including recent disbanding of crucial assessment teams and the removal of informative resources, highlights an alarming commitment to climate denialism that threatens public health and safety. The positions of Koonin, Spencer, and Christy signal a broader strategy that seeks to promote fringe perspectives at the expense of scientifically-backed evidence, ultimately endangering vital climate action while favoring the interests of the fossil fuel industry.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/08/climate/doe-climate-contrarians-trump)

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Dismisses Vaccine Advisory Panel in Disturbing Political Move

US Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has undertaken a shocking move by dismissing all members of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices (ACIP), a critical panel that informs vaccine recommendations for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In a display of blatant disregard for established public health practices, Kennedy labeled the committee as “plagued with conflicts of interest” and justified his decision through an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.

The unprecedented decision to replace the entire 17-member committee has drawn concerns from public health experts, who argue that such a sweeping action undermines the integrity of vaccine policy development. Kennedy’s claim that the existing members were “last-minute appointees” of the Biden administration lacks credibility, particularly as ACIP members are intended to be independent experts in fields such as pediatrics and epidemiology.

Kennedy’s actions echo the troubling trend of politicizing science under the Trump administration, a period characterized by disinformation and hostility towards public health. He indicates that the current panel’s removal is necessary for the Trump administration to gain control over the committee before 2028, signaling a clear agenda to reshape immunization policies to align with partisan interests rather than scientific consensus.

The forthcoming ACIP meeting, scheduled for June 25, intends to address major vaccination topics including Covid-19 and HPV, but experts like Dorit Reiss caution that the rushed appointments of new committee members will lead to insufficient vetting and unresolved conflicts of interest. This situation only exacerbates existing eroded trust in vaccine efficacy and safety, which has been weaponized by anti-vaccine rhetoric during the Trump era.

In making these moves, Kennedy exemplifies the broader anti-science stance that is characteristic of the Republican Party, driven by a disregard for empirical evidence and public health ethics. As he attempts to reshape the landscape of U.S. immunization policy, it is critical for the public and policymakers alike to remain vigilant against the dangers posed by this administration’s pursuit of a scientifically compromised health agenda.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/09/health/rfk-cdc-vaccine-advisers-removed?Date=20250609&Profile=CNN,CNN+Politics&utm_content=1749503904&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook)

FEMA Director Ignorant of Hurricane Season, Staff Alarmed

FEMA Director David Richardson’s recent comments about the U.S. hurricane season have left agency staff bewildered. During a briefing on the second day of the season, Richardson claimed he was unaware that the hurricane season had started, raising alarms among employees about his competence and preparedness for their critical work.

The hurricane season officially kicked off on June 1, anticipated to bring up to 10 hurricanes according to forecasts from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Despite expectations for heightened storm activity, Richardson announced no changes to FEMA’s disaster response plans, contradicting earlier indications that updates were forthcoming.

This incident highlights significant internal confusion within FEMA, exacerbated by staff cuts and a dramatic decline in hurricane preparedness measures as aligned with Trump administration policies. Since Trump took office, about one-third of FEMA’s full-time employees have left, raising serious concerns about the agency’s ability to respond to disasters effectively.

Richardson’s leadership style, infused with military references from his past as a Marine artillery officer, has not instilled confidence among FEMA staff. His previous role involved countering threats rather than managing disaster responses, further questioning his suitability for the FEMA head position. This backdrop of continuous leadership instability, marked by the firing of former FEMA Chief Cameron Hamilton for opposing Trump’s agenda, underscores a chronic misalignment between the agency and its mission.

With critical positions filled by individuals with limited disaster response experience and FEMA’s operational capacity diminishes, the future looks grim. The current federal administration’s inclination to downsize FEMA, as articulated by Trump and reinforced by his allies, raises deep worries about the safety and security of communities facing impending natural disasters.

(h/t: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fema-staff-confused-after-head-said-he-was-unaware-us-hurricane-season-sources-2025-06-02/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR72ksaX8_2PiLakw4rJaSm3l24L2An83Ez5V3nT-nhajCiypHlYOYYH1y5WkQ_aem_7eV0VmiDlnqY7WI7BPq8TQ)

RFK Jr. Declares Autism Epidemic, Shuns Scientific Consensus

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the current Secretary of Health and Human Services, has declared the rising rates of autism in the U.S. an “epidemic.” Speaking at a press conference on April 16, 2025, Kennedy reported a significant increase in autism prevalence, stating it rose from 1 in 36 children in 2020 to 1 in 31 in 2022, as recognized in a recent CDC report. He attributed this alarming uptick to unidentified environmental toxins, vowing to expedite research into these causes, which contrasts sharply with assertions from public health experts.

In his address, Kennedy dismissed the idea that the rise in autism diagnoses is merely a result of improved diagnostic practices, insisting that a genuine epidemic exists. He pledged that within weeks, the HHS will unveil new studies aimed at pinpointing these environmental factors, emphasizing a shift in funding away from genetic research, which he termed a “dead end.” While he claims his approach will yield quick answers, experts have criticized the timeline, arguing that robust research requires comprehensive planning and execution.

Opposition from autism researchers and advocates quickly followed Kennedy’s announcements, as many pointed out that the increase in autism rates can largely be explained by better diagnostics and increased awareness. They stress that autism is influenced by a combination of genetic, biological, and environmental factors rather than a singular cause. Experts like Catherine Lord and Zachary Warren have called attention to the complexity of autism, asserting there is no single factor responsible for its manifestation.

Kennedy’s narrative drew further scrutiny as some of his comments about autistic individuals were perceived as dehumanizing. He suggested that many children diagnosed with autism would never lead typical lives, remarks that critics labeled offensive and stigmatizing. Advocacy groups expressed deep concern over his fear-mongering rhetoric, highlighting that it serves the anti-vaccine agenda rooted in the Trump administration’s policies rather than advancing the well-being of autistic individuals and their families.

The push for research into environmental factors is welcomed by some, yet the prevailing consensus aligns that such projects must be scientifically grounded, without propagating debunked myths linking vaccines to autism. As the HHS prepares to embark on its research initiatives, advocates stress the urgency of focusing on immediate resources and support for autistic individuals, rather than perpetuating harmful stances that undermine public health and basic human dignity.

(h/t: https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/04/16/nx-s1-5366676/autism-cdc-rates-rfk-research)

FDA Vaccine Official Resigns, Citing Public Health Risks from Kennedy’s Misinformation

The resignation of Dr. Peter Marks, the FDA’s leading vaccine official, highlights the dangerous direction of public health policy under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Marks characterized Kennedy’s push for vaccine misinformation as a risk to public health, stating, “truth and transparency are not desired by the secretary, but rather he wishes subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies.” His departure underscores a significant shift in the FDA’s approach to vaccine safety, which has historically been grounded in robust scientific evidence.

Dr. Marks expressed concern about Kennedy’s aggressive anti-vaccine stance, which threatens decades of public health advancements and the safety of vaccines that have been proven to save millions of lives. Since taking office, Kennedy has issued guidelines that not only undermine vaccine trust but also include promoting debunked treatments such as vitamin A for measles, further imperiling public health amid ongoing outbreaks fueled by vaccination hesitancy.

Marks pointed out that the resurgence of measles, linked to decreasing vaccination rates—particularly among unvaccinated children—could have devastating consequences, as echoed by his mentioning the 100,000 children who died from measles in Africa and Asia last year due to lack of vaccinations. His call for public meetings to address vaccine safety concerns was rebuffed, indicating a top-down approach that values political agendas over scientific dialogue.

Kennedy has moved to install staff connected to the anti-vaccine movement within the CDC, potentially distorting the gathering and analysis of vital vaccine safety data. His plans to launch a vaccine injury agency within the CDC only exacerbate fears that he aims to disproportionately emphasize vaccine risks that have been shown to be minimal compared to the benefits of immunization, creating a perilous narrative undermining established medical practices.

The departure of Dr. Marks represents a critical juncture for the FDA, which now faces a profound challenge under Kennedy’s influence as he seeks to dismantle scientific integrity in favor of populist rhetoric. As Marks noted in his resignation, “the unprecedented assault on scientific truth that has adversely impacted public health in our nation” must cease to ensure citizens can fully benefit from advances in medical science.

(h/t: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/28/health/fda-vaccines-rfk-jr-peter-marks.html)

Vaccine skeptic appointed to lead controversial study on autism

A vaccine skeptic with a history of promoting discredited claims linking immunizations to autism has been chosen by the federal government to lead a crucial study on this topic. David Geier, who is known for long-standing false assertions regarding vaccines and autism, is engaged by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) despite widespread scientific rejection of these theories.

Geier, listed as a data analyst within HHS, has previously faced administrative action for practicing medicine without a license and has a dubious track record in public health research. His hiring raises serious concerns among experts that the upcoming study will propagate flawed conclusions that could erode public confidence in vaccines, undermining decades of credible research by credible scientists.

Alison Singer, president of the Autism Science Foundation, articulated the gravity of this appointment, criticizing the administration for seemingly starting with a predetermined conclusion to support the baseless theory that vaccines cause autism. She underscored that this approach completely contradicts the scientific method, which requires evidence to inform conclusions.

Moreover, HHS directives have shifted the oversight of the vaccine-autism study to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) shortly after President Trump made controversial comments linking rising autism rates to vaccinations. The reallocation of responsibility to NIH and Geier’s involvement signifies a troubling trend in health administration that prioritizes speculative assertions over established medical findings, which overwhelmingly dissociate vaccines from autism.

Experts, including public health researcher Jessica Steier, emphasize that employing individuals like Geier undermines the integrity of public health work. Their involvement is seen as deeply damaging to vaccination initiatives at a time when public health is already strained by misinformation and skepticism, especially in the wake of public health crises exacerbated by lies propagated by Trump’s administration and anti-vaccine advocates.

(h/t: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/03/25/vaccine-skeptic-hhs-rfk-immunization-autism/?mc_cid=cb50cb3410&mc_eid=f0ea8849aa)

1 2 3 … 18