WASHINGTON — Health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
once said there are no vaccines that are safe and effective. On Wednesday, he seemed to have changed his tune.
Across two Senate hearings, Kennedy noted that as health secretary, he funded the development of new vaccines, green-lit new shots for patients, asserted flu vaccines are preventive care, and even urged “every child to get the MMR,” a shot he previously suggested wasn’t safe. Last week, he acknowledged the shot could have saved the life of a child who died of measles.
Kennedy’s agenda continues to make waves across American health care, as his department pursues a broad crackdown on alleged fraud and seeks to upend Americans’ relationship with ultra-processed foods , all after major cuts across health agencies and a reworking of vaccine policy. But the about-face expands to a number of core MAHA issues — chemicals in food and the government’s relationship with industry among them.
Robert F.
Kennedy Jr., serving as health secretary, publicly presented a notable change in stance on vaccines during two Senate hearings.
Previously quoted as saying no vaccines are safe and effective, he said he has funded development of new vaccines, approved new vaccines for patients, characterized influenza vaccination as preventive care, and encouraged universal childhood MMR vaccination—positions at variance with past public statements.
Summary is based on a STAT News Research Highlights item referencing Kennedy’s testimony across two Senate hearings and related public comments.
The source indicates this represents an apparent reversal of earlier assertions attributed to Kennedy but does not provide verbatim transcripts or comprehensive documentation of all comments.
According to the piece, Kennedy’s department has pursued several high-profile initiatives: a broad effort to target alleged health-care fraud, actions addressing consumption of ultra-processed foods, significant budgetary reductions across health agencies, and modifications to vaccine policy.
The article links these administrative actions to broader shifts within the administration’s agenda.
The coverage states that elements of the MAHA constituency—described as an insurgent movement that supported the administration—have grown skeptical as some MAHA priorities are deprioritized, creating tension between retaining political support and abandoning items seen as impractical or politically risky.
The STAT item is a brief highlight directing readers to a subscriber-only full article.