Will Abandoning Science Really Make America Healthy Again?

From rushed vaccine schedule changes to silencing career experts, the RFK Jr. and Susan Monarez hearings reveal a troubling shift at the CDC.

The recent Senate hearings of Human and Health Services (HHS) Secretary Ronald F. Kennedy Jr. and his former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Susan Monarez reveal that the slogan “Make America Healthy Again” may be more political gloss than committed evidence-based policy.

The hearings make clear there are serious concerns that this administration is approving CDC recommendations without scientific data, sidelining medical professionals, replacing them with political appointees, and making sweeping vaccine policy shifts with questionable transparency.

What the Monarez Hearing Made Clear

Dr. Susan Monarez was confirmed as CDC Director on July 31, 2025, with Senate support and strong praise from Secretary Kennedy, who called her “a public health expert with unimpeachable scientific credentials.” Her tenure lasted just 29 days, ending on August 27, 2025.

She testified that the reason was her refusal to rubber-stamp proposals:

She alleged she was ordered her to pre-approve recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), “regardless of scientific evidence.”
She also claims she was told to fire “career vaccine scientists” without cause.
On August 2, she learned via media that experts from major medical societies had been removed from ACIP working groups
On August 8, she learned changes might be made to the childhood vaccine schedule without credible supporting data.
On August 19, she received a directive requiring prior approval of her political staff for CDC policy and personnel decisions.

Monarez emphasized repeatedly in her testimony that her concern was not personal: it was about “the future of trust in public health.”

Another witness, Dr. Debra Houry, echoed fears that scientific independence was being undermined. Dr. Debra Houry, MD, MPH served as Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Director for Program and Science at the CDC. Over her decade-long career there, she worked through multiple administrations and was deeply involved in public health policy and oversight.

Dr. Houry testified that she resigned because Secretary Kennedy’s actions “censored CDC science, politicized our processes, and stripped agency leaders of the ability to protect the health of the American people.”

RFK Jr. Hearing: Agenda vs. Evidence

In Secretary Kennedy’s earlier confirmation hearing, several statements raised concern among scientists and public health professionals:

He pledged to bring back “gold-standard science” at HHS.
He stated that chronic diseases like diabetes, obesity, autoimmune conditions are exploding, and that prevention (especially through diet, reducing environmental toxins, etc.) must be central.
But when asked about vaccine safety and vaccine policy, senators pressed him to clarify whether he would follow the scientific consensus. Some concerns were raised about his past statements that challenged vaccine safety or expressed skepticism. Senator Mike Crapo, for example, said: “We share your interest … would you share … why you are passionate about the nutrition-oriented disease prevention …” and referenced that since universal vaccination for children, the number of acute hepatitis B cases has dropped by almost 90%.

While Kennedy’s focus on chronic disease prevention resonated with some lawmakers, his past skepticism about vaccines led to repeated questioning about the current childhood immunization schedule. This left the us with more questions than answers about whether decisions at HHS will continue to be grounded in peer-reviewed evidence or shaped by political ideology.

What’s Terrifying About the Implications

The testimony from Monarez and Houry painted a chilling picture of what happens when politics undermines science. Decisions are made behind closed doors, expert voices are silenced, and public health guidance becomes a tool for ideology rather than evidence.

Erosion of scientific oversight: When decisions that were formerly made based on peer review and scientific consensus are instead being demanded in advance, without evidence, or by people not trained in epidemiology or vaccine science, the possibility of harmful policy is real.
Risk of outbreaks: Altering vaccine schedules or weakening advisory experts can increase the risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. Monarez noted that meeting changes could happen in September for childhood vaccine schedules, possibly without credible data.
Damage to public trust: Perhaps the greatest danger is losing the public’s confidence in the CDC and other health institutions. Monarez kept returning to the theme: this is not about her, it’s about trust.
Potential fallout for health care access: Changing vaccine policy without care may expose parents to uncertainty, legal or bureaucratic hurdles, and possibly exacerbate disparities in vulnerable populations.

Families without strong access to pediatric care or reliable insurance coverage would be the first to feel these effects, deepening inequities that federal health agencies are meant to reduce.

Make America Healthy Again? Or Science Undermined?

The Monarez hearing demonstrates that this administration is pushing vaccine policy changes without the rigorous scientific review that has historically guided these decisions, insisting on political approval of matters that should be handled by career scientists. Further, experienced medical professionals have been asked to step aside or were removed from advisory roles, raising serious concerns about the expertise guiding public health decisions.

When the administration uses the slogan Make America Healthy Again but undermines evidence-based processes, it creates a crisis of trust in our public health system. These hearings make it clear that science is taking a back seat to politics, and the result could be dangerous for our nation’s health.