RFK Jr and the chaos at the CDC – podcast
RFK Jr faces calls to quit as CDC chief fired and senior staff resign: ‘an embarrassment’Support the Guardian: theguardian.com/sciencepod More
Science
Subterms
Latest story
More stories
- in US Politics
Can you solve it? Are you a genius at gerrymandering?
Gerrymandering is the practice of redrawing the boundaries of political districts to favour certain parties or politicians.On Friday, Texas governor Greg Abbott signed a new redistricting bill with a gerrymandered map that will heavily favour Republicans – and California governor Gavin Newsom plans to retaliate by doing the same in his state for Democrats.Irresepective of the politics of gerrymandering, however, the ruse conceals some interesting maths. Such as – given a certain distribution of voters, how do you draw a map that makes the minority party win the majority of districts?It’s exactly this question that underlies today’s puzzles.In each of the grids below, the challenge is to find the unique electoral map in which the minority colour wins the most regions. A region is defined as a contiguous block of cells that are joined either horizontally or vertically. (A region cannot contain any cells that are only connected diagonally, i.e. via a corner.) Winning a region means having the most cells in that region.The puzzles were conceived by Brady Forrest, a university student in Toronto, whose online alias is Deckard.ExampleDivide the grid into 3 regions of 3 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of the regions.To solve using pencil and paper, click here for a print out (and some bonus puzzles). To play on your screen, below each puzzle is a link to an interactive version.Puzzle 1: EasyDivide the grid into 5 regions of 5 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions.View image in fullscreenPuzzle 2: MediumDivide the grid into 5 regions of 10 cells each. Purple, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions. No ties allowed in any region.View image in fullscreenPuzzle 3: HardDivide the grid into 7 regions of 7 cells each. Blue, the minority colour, must win the majority of regions. No ties allowed for first place in any region.View image in fullscreenI’ll be back at 5pm UK with the solutions.NO SPOILERS Please discuss the maths of gerrymandering.Thanks to Deckard for sharing his puzzles. Thanks to Starwort for the interactive versions.I’ve been setting a puzzle here on alternate Mondays since 2015. I’m always on the look-out for great puzzles. If you would like to suggest one, email me.View image in fullscreenIn other Gerry-related news, here’s a fact from my new book, Football School Facts. Gerry Taggart (ex-Bolton) is one of only four Premier League players to have been sent off on their birthdays. The wrong sort of card! This curio and hundreds of others appear in the book, the latest in the long-running series I write with Ben Lyttleton for children aged 7 to 107. Football School Facts is full-colour, hardback, would make an excellent gift, and is available at the Guardian Bookshop. More
- in US Politics
CDC in crisis: who are the top officials resigning or being forced out?
A dispute over the dismissal of Susan Monarez, director of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), has intensified, with her attorneys asserting she will not leave unless the president himself takes action.Monarez was officially removed late on Wednesday following a heated exchange in which the US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, attempted to oust her, according to the White House. Her lawyer has countered that Monarez has no intention of resigning.As she was confirmed by the Senate, unlike previous CDC directors, Monarez technically serves at the will of the president, so Kennedy alone may not have had the authority to terminate her.Monarez, an infectious disease expert, was sworn in just a month ago by Kennedy but soon found herself at odds with him over vaccine policy, according to individuals familiar with the matter. In the wake of her removal, four senior CDC leaders abruptly resigned, apparently out of frustration with Kennedy’s approach to vaccines and his management style.Here’s a breakdown of the CDC leaders involved.Susan Monarez Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention View image in fullscreenMonarez is a microbiologist with bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees from the University of Wisconsin. She joined the CDC as principal deputy director in January 2025, briefly served as acting director, and was confirmed by the Senate as the agency’s 21st director on 31 July. She became the first director without a medical degree and the first confirmed under a 2023 law.On 27 August, she was dismissed over conflicts about vaccine policy, a move her legal team has argued was improper because only the president has the authority to remove her.Debra HouryFormer chief medical officer and deputy director for program and science at the CDCView image in fullscreenHoury, a physician with degrees from Emory University and Tulane University, previously worked as an emergency doctor and at various facilities in Atlanta, as well as serving in academic leadership roles. At the CDC, she served as chief medical officer and deputy director for program and science.She resigned in late August 2025 following Monarez’s removal, citing the spread of vaccine misinformation, looming budget reductions and political meddling that she said undermined the agency’s mission.Demetre DaskalakisFormer director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases at the CDCView image in fullscreenDaskalakis, a public health physician known for his leadership in HIV prevention and vaccination programs, led the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. He received his medical degree from the NYU School of Medicine and completed postgraduate medical training at Harvard Medical School in 2003, before joining the CDC in 2020 as director of the division of HIV/Aids Prevention.He resigned from the CDC on 28 August, publishing a letter that denounced political interference, data manipulation and what he called a decline in scientific integrity.Daniel JerniganFormer director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDCView image in fullscreenJernigan, a longtime CDC official, directed the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases and played a key role in influenza and pandemic preparedness. Jernigan first joined the CDC’s epidemic intelligence service in 1994 and worked in the respiratory diseases branch on the prevention and control of bacterial respiratory pathogens.He left his position in August 2025 after Monarez’s ouster, joining other top officials in objecting to what they saw as the politicization of science and diminished trust in the agency’s leadership.Jennifer LaydenFormer director of office of public health data, science, technology at the CDCView image in fullscreenLayden, who led the office of public health data, surveillance, and technology at the CDC, focused on modernizing outbreak tracking and response systems. Layden received both her doctor of medicine and her doctorate in epidemiology from the University of Illinois at Chicago.Formerly Illinois’ chief medical officer, she also resigned after Monarez’s removal in August 2025, warning about the damaging effects of political influence on science-based decision-making. More
- in US Politics
‘Distracting the public’: group of health professionals call for RFK Jr to be removed
A grassroots organization of health professionals have released a report outlining major health challenges in the US and calling for the removal of Robert F Kennedy Jr from the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).The report from Defend Public Health, a new organization of about 3,000 health professionals and allies, is an attempt to get ahead of misinformation and lack of information from health officials.In an effort to keep making progress in public health, Defend Public Health’s report was slated to coincide with that of the anticipated second US report to “make America healthy again” (Maha). The first Maha report was released in May, and a second report was expected this week – but amid turmoil at the health agencies, it has reportedly been delayed for several weeks.“The Maha report is essentially a distraction from the real causes of poor health,” said Elizabeth Jacobs, professor emerita at the University of Arizona and a founding member of Defend Public Health.“This administration does not want to address things like poverty and education and access to healthcare. Instead, they’re distracting the public with information on solutions to problems that don’t actually exist. When the foundation of your policy is not evidence-based, it will collapse.”The Defend Public Health report diverges from the previous Maha focus on issues such as processed foods and environmental chemicals, but it covers familiar ground in public health.The group highlights the importance of food safety, security and access to food, including through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Snap), and improved opportunities for physical activity.They seek to ensure equitable access to vaccines; expand access to healthcare, including comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare access; and build strategies for clean air.The report also recommends fully funding scientific research and public health systems; combatting scientific misinformation, including from the US government; and strengthening pandemic preparedness. They call for reductions in gun violence, now the number one cause of death for children.And their last recommendation is to remove Robert F Kennedy Jr, secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), from office, calling his removal “the single most important step toward improving the health of Americans”.The recommendations are exactly what the US needs to address to become healthier, said Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association (APHA). If you “look at the things that actually kill people, from the 10 leading causes of death, that is indeed the right list”.The US spends twice as much on healthcare as the next industrialized country, despite having poorer health outcomes, Benjamin pointed out.“The fracturing of our healthcare system undermines the accessibility of healthcare,” Benjamin said before noting that the US also spends less than other countries on the social determinants of health and social supports, and invests less in primary care and prevention.Such gaps are getting worse under the second Trump administration, with huge cuts to Medicaid, affordable housing, and nutrition programs like Snap.“If they’re serious about making America healthy again, I would suggest that we first begin by feeding children,” Jacobs said. “When, for example, RFK Jr is talking about food dyes, I don’t think that that is anywhere near as important as the fact that 13 million children in the United States do not know where their next meal is coming from.”Scientific misinformation is an “existential threat” to Americans, and the US government is a “major source” of misinformation and disinformation now, Jacobs said.The first Maha report “contains misinformation and uses references that don’t even exist”, she noted. The Defend Public Health report has a tongue-in-cheek note that it was “created by real human experts relying on real rigorous data”.Jacobs recommended working with social media companies, “one of the biggest amplifiers of misinformation”, to address the spread of harmful information. Educating children on how to evaluate the quality and accuracy of information is also important, she said.But one of the biggest purveyors of health misinformation is Kennedy himself.“Everything that he is doing is horrifying,” Jacobs said. “There is a saying in public health, ‘saving lives a million at a time’, and he is doing the opposite of that.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionShe called him a “genuine threat” who is “devastating” public health.“He has no knowledge, training or experience in any type of science. He’s never done an experiment, he’s never written a paper, he’s never gotten a grant to study anything. He has no understanding of the underlying causes of poor health in the United States,” Jacobs said.Defend Public Health launched in November, after Trump’s re-election because, as Jacobs said, “it was very clear to us that public health specifically was going to be under attack.”“We knew that it was going to be a tough fight. I don’t think that any of us knew how bad this was going to get, how quickly. But we are doing everything in our power to support our fellow researchers, public health workers, anybody that we can, and also continue to get accurate information out to the public,” Jacobs said.The group joins other established health organizations as well as other newcomers like the Vaccine Integrity Project to serve as reliable sources of information.There’s a long history of groups like these providing outside perspectives on official recommendations, Benjamin said. But the federal government is uniquely positioned to speak to the health of all Americans.“Pediatricians certainly have the nation’s trust around vaccines for kids, but there’s a big debate about at what point does a kid become an adolescent, become an adult? At what point do they go into the adult health system?” he said.That creates confusion around which advice a patient should follow. The same may be true of a patient who becomes pregnant, or someone who may fall under the purview of multiple health organizations. It’s not always easy to know who belongs in which group.“We have to be careful that each of these private sector organizations align our recommendations, so that we don’t further confuse the public,” Benjamin said.Yet, Benjamin continued, “as the federal government withdraws in its responsibility to protect the public, groups like ours will become more influential in filling that void until we can get the federal government again to step up into that place as a trusted advisor.”Benjamin and Jacobs – and other experts in these groups – hope that the federal government will once again become a source of reliable information.“We really wanted to start building a framework so that we’re ready when we have the opportunity to start putting some of our policy recommendations in place,” Jacobs said.“There is just rampant chaos right now around public health and science related to this administration, and we have got to stand firm and keep bringing the conversation back to the actual causes of poor health among Americans. I can’t control what the government is going to decide to do. What we can do is continue to provide accurate information to the public.” More
- in US Politics
‘Impossible to rebuild’: NIH scientists say Trump cuts will imperil life-saving research
Last week, the office of management and budget (OMB) revealed plans to freeze all outside funding for National Institutes of Health research this fiscal year, but reversed course later that day, leaving the scientific community in a state of whiplash. A senior official at the NIH who spoke on condition of anonymity said this was just the latest in a “multi-prong” approach by the Trump administration to destroy American scientific research.In July, the National Cancer Institute, which is part of the NIH, updated its website to reflect Trump administration plans to significantly cut cancer research spending as well. Since January, the administration has been cancelling NIH grants, in some cases targeting other specific research areas, such as HIV treatment and prevention.“It’s really, really bad at NIH right now,” said the official, who added that researchers working outside the NIH have been unaware of the severity of the situation until recently, even though they have also faced funding upheaval since the winter.“The Trump administration is, for the first time in history, substantially intervening inside NIH to bring it under political control,” the official said. “That’s what we saw this week with the OMB freeze on funding.”“I think the core of it is that they want to destroy universities, or at least turn them into rightwing ideological factories,” the official said, since the majority of the NIH’s grants are distributed to researchers in universities, medical schools and similar institutions.In 2021, JD Vance gave a speech entitled The Universities Are the Enemy. The official said they were alarmed at how little universities are fighting back – many have settled with the administration, which has “gotten Columbia to completely knuckle under. One of America’s most significant universities and a place that is a worldwide magnet for talents. Same thing at Penn. Now they’re going after UCLA.”Institutions such as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have also stayed on the sidelines, refusing to sufficiently resist Trump, the official said.If the administration does manage to freeze NIH funding, it will push to rescind the funds permanently using a rescission motion, the official said. This type of motion only requires a simple majority of 50 votes to pass the Senate, instead of the supermajority necessary to beat a filibuster. Republicans would have enough votes to “ram through these motions to effectively cut the budget without Democrats in Congress weighing in. It’s an ongoing disaster.”Researchers at the many universities where the administration has frozen funding, such as Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, are starting to feel the gravity of the situation, said the official. Carole LaBonne, a biologist at Northwestern, said “university labs are hanging by a thread”, explaining that even though the OMB reversed its decision to freeze outside NIH funding, “the baseline reality is not much better”.Other recent changes at the NIH include allocating research grants all at once rather than over multiple years, so that fewer projects are funded. Reductions in cancer research funding also mean that only 4% of relevant grant applications will move forward. “This will effectively shut down cancer research in this country and destroy the careers of many scientists. This is devastating,” LaBonne said.The extreme uncertainty surrounding scientific research is also negatively affecting scientists’ mental health. “I do not know any faculty who are not incredibly stressed right now, wondering how long they will be able to keep their labs going and if/when they will have to let laboratory staff go,” LaBonne said. “It also very hard to motivate oneself to write grants, a painstaking and time-intensive processes, when there is a 96% chance it will not be funded.”Ryan Gutenkunst, who heads the department of molecular and cellular biology at the University of Arizona, said: “The chaos at NIH is definitely freaking [faculty and students] out and wasting huge amounts of emotional energy and time. We were emailing about the latest pause, only to find it unpaused hours later.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe senior NIH official found last week’s events unsurprising, they said: “They’re throwing everything at the wall to stop NIH from spending. What struck me was that many of my colleagues at universities were like, ‘Oh, my God, they’re stopping grants.’ And it really seemed to activate people in a way that I hadn’t seen before, whereas a lot of us at NIH thought, ‘Oh, they just did another thing.’”Science is an engine for American economic dominance, and scientific clusters such as Silicon Valley could not exist without federal funding, the official said. “Once you break them, it will be impossible to rebuild them. We’re on the path to breaking them.”LaBonne said she worried about the impact on progress in cancer specifically. “My own research touches on pediatric cancers. Forty years ago more than 60% of children diagnosed with cancer would have died within five years of diagnosis. Today there is a 90% survival rate. We should not put progress like that in danger,” she said.Although many major scientific institutions have complied with the administration, grassroots organizations and individual scientists, including those within the NIH, are finding ways to resist.The senior NIH official said they were most hopeful about grassroots organizers who are resisting the Trump administration openly, rather than relying on older strategies such as litigation and negotiations with Congress. For example, Science Homecoming, a website to promote science communication, is encouraging scientists to get the word out about the importance of federal funding to their home towns.The Bethesda Declaration, signed by 484 NIH staff, directly accused NIH director Jay Bhattacharya of “a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally appropriated funds for critical NIH research. Each day that the NIH continues to disrupt research, your ability to deliver on this duty narrows.” More
- in US Politics
Hundreds of Nasa workers rebuke ‘arbitrary’ Trump cuts in scathing letter
Almost 300 current and former US Nasa employees, including at least four astronauts, have issued a scathing dissent opposing the Trump administration’s sweeping and indiscriminate cuts to the agency, which they say threaten safety, innovation and national security.The formal letter, titled The Voyager Declaration, is addressed to the acting Nasa administrator, Sean Duffy, a staunch Trump loyalist appointed on 7 July who is also his transportation secretary. The declaration, which is dedicated to 17 astronauts who have died in past spaceflight incidents, warns of catastrophic consequences if the proposed cuts to science grants, staffing and international missions are implemented.“Major programmatic shifts at Nasa must be implemented strategically so that risks are managed carefully,” the letter said. “Instead, the last six months have seen rapid and wasteful changes which have undermined our mission and caused catastrophic impacts on Nasa’s workforce.“We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political momentum over human safety, scientific advancement, and efficient use of public resources. These cuts are arbitrary and have been enacted in defiance of congressional appropriations law. The consequences for the agency and the country alike are dire.”The letter sounds the alarm over suggested changes to Nasa’s Technical Authority, a system of safety checks and balances established in the wake of the 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster that killed seven astronauts. “The culture of organizational silence promoted at Nasa over the last six months already represents a dangerous turn away from the lessons learned after the Columbia disaster,” the declaration states.The declaration has 131 named signatures – including at least 55 current Nasa employees – and 156 anonymous signatories. Interim administrator Duffy, a former television host who was appointed after the ousting of a longtime Nasa employee, Janet Petro, is the final step in the chain of Technical Authority command.Trump’s billionaire donor and former ally Elon Musk oversaw the loss of at least 2,600 of Nasa’s 17,000-plus employees, according to Politico, before the billionaire businessman stepped back from the so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge). So far, at least $120m in Nasa grants have been terminated, and the White House has proposed slashing a quarter of the agency’s total budget for next year. International missions have been cancelled, and almost half the agency’s science budget could be cut in 2026.The signatories said they dissent from the indiscriminate cuts to Nasa research which supports national security by ensuring the US role as a global leader in science and technology. “Basic research in space science, aeronautics, and the stewardship of the Earth are inherently governmental functions that cannot and will not be taken up by the private sector,” the letter says.The Voyager Declaration, named after the twin Nasa spacecraft that are exploring interstellar space, is only the latest formal dissent against Trump’s unprecedented assault on science and federal agencies.In June, at least 300 employees at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) published a declaration calling for the restoration of grants into life-saving treatments that the Trump administration had “delayed or terminated for political reasons”.Earlier in July, 140 workers at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were placed on administrative leave after signing a letter highlighting key concerns including a culture of fear at the agency, the cancellation of environmental justice programs and grants, undermining public trust and “ignoring scientific consensus to protect polluters”. More
- in US Politics
Trump’s EPA eliminates research and development office and begins layoffs
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on Friday it is eliminating its research and development arm and reducing agency staff by thousands of employees. One union leader said the moves “will devastate public health in our country”.The agency’s office of research and development (ORD) has long provided the scientific underpinnings for the EPA’s mission to protect the environment and human health. The EPA said in May it would shift its scientific expertise and research efforts to program offices that focus on major issues such as air and water.The agency said on Friday it is creating a new office of applied science and environmental solutions that will allow it to focus on research and science “more than ever before”.Once fully implemented, the changes will save the EPA nearly $750m, officials said.Representative Zoe Lofgren of California, the top Democrat on the House science committee, called the elimination of the research office “a travesty”.“The Trump administration is firing hardworking scientists while employing political appointees whose job it is to lie incessantly to Congress and to the American people,” she said. “The obliteration of ORD will have generational impacts on Americans’ health and safety.”EPA administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement that the changes announced Friday would ensure the agency “is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment, while Powering the Great American Comeback”.The EPA also said it is beginning the process to eliminate thousands of jobs, following asupreme court ruling last week that cleared the way for Donald Trump’s plans to downsize the federal workforce, despite warnings that critical government services will be lost and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will be out of their jobs.Total staffing at EPA will go down to 12,448, a reduction of more than 3,700 employees, or nearly 23%, from staffing levels in January when Trump took office, the agency said.“This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars,” Zeldin said, using a government term for mass firings.The office of research and development “is the heart and brain of the EPA”, said Justin Chen, president of American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, which represents thousands of EPA employees.“Without it, we don’t have the means to assess impacts upon human health and the environment,” Chen said. “Its destruction will devastate public health in our country.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe research office – EPA’s main science arm – currently has 1,540 positions, excluding special government employees and public health officers, according to agency documents reviewed by Democratic staff on the House science panel earlier this year. As many as 1,155 chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists could be laid off, the documents indicated.The research office has 10 facilities across the country, stretching from Florida and North Carolina to Oregon. An EPA spokeswoman said that all laboratory functions currently conducted by the research office will continue.In addition to the reduction in force, the agency also is offering the third round of deferred resignations for eligible employees, including research office staff, spokeswoman Molly Vaseliou said. The application period is open until 25 July.The EPA’s announcement comes two weeks after the agency put on administrative leave 139 employees who signed a “declaration of dissent” with agency policies under the Trump administration. The agency accused the employees of “unlawfully undermining” Trump’s agenda.In a letter made public on 30June, the employees wrote that the EPA is no longer living up to its mission to protect human health and the environment. The letter represented rare public criticism from agency employees who knew they could face retaliation for speaking out.Associated Press contributed to reporting More
- in US Politics
DoJ drops charges against Utah doctor accused of destroying Covid vaccines
The US Department of Justice dropped charges on Saturday against Michael Kirk Moore, the Utah doctor accused of destroying more than $28,000 worth of government-provided Covid-19 vaccines and administering saline to children instead of the shot.Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, announced the news in a statement on the social media platform X, saying the charges had been dismissed under her direction.“Dr Moore gave his patients a choice when the federal government refused to do so,” Bondi said. “He did not deserve the years in prison he was facing.”According to a 2023 press release from the US attorney’s office in Utah, Moore distributed at least 1,937 fraudulent vaccination record cards in exchange for either direct payment or required donations to a specific charity. The minors he gave saline shots to were under the impression, at the request of their parents, that they were receiving a Covid-19 shot. Moore ran the operations from a plastic surgery center in Midvale, Utah, and was charged, along with three other co-defendants, with conspiracy to defraud the United States.Far-right congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene thanked Bondi in a statement on X and called Moore a “hero who refused to inject his patients with a government-mandated unsafe vaccine”.The Utah senator Mike Lee also weighed in, saying on X that he was glad Moore could remain a free man and that countless Americans endured lies and lockdowns during the pandemic.Moore was indicted by the justice department in 2023. He pleaded not guilty to the charges, which also included conspiracy to convert, sell, convey and dispose of government property, and the conversion, sale, conveyance and disposal of government property.The fake vaccination records were sold under Moore’s scheme for $50 each, and operations allegedly ran between May 2021 and September 2022. Attorneys for Moore argued that the regulations set at the time by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) were unconstitutional.The charges against Moore were brought in when Joe Biden was president, but Covid-19 conspiracists and skeptics have been embraced in the new administration under Trump.Recently, the Trump administration canceled a $766m award to Moderna on the research and development of H5N1 bird flu vaccines, and officials announced new restrictions and regulations for Covid mRNA vaccines.The US health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, who has for decades baselessly sowed doubt about vaccine safety, contrary to scientific research, thanked Moore in a statement on X back in April.“Dr Moore deserves a medal for his courage and his commitment to healing,” Kennedy Jr said. More
- in US Politics
RFK Jr’s ‘Maha’ report found to contain citations to nonexistent studies
Robert F Kennedy Jr’s flagship health commission report contains citations to studies that do not exist, according to an investigation by the US publication Notus.The report exposes glaring scientific failures from a health secretary who earlier this week threatened to ban government scientists from publishing in leading medical journals.The 73-page “Make America healthy again” report – which was commissioned by the Trump administration to examine the causes of chronic illness, and which Kennedy promoted it as “gold-standard” science backed by more than 500 citations – includes references to seven studies that appear to be entirely invented, and others that the researchers say have been mischaracterized.Two supposed studies on ADHD medication advertising simply do not exist in the journals where they are claimed to be published. Virginia Commonwealth University confirmed to Notus that researcher Robert L Findling, listed as an author of one paper, never wrote such an article, while another citation leads only to the Kennedy report itself when searched online.Harold J Farber, a pediatric specialist supposedly behind research on asthma overprescribing, told Notus he never wrote the cited paper and had never worked with the other listed authors.The US Department of Health and Human Services has not immediately responded to a Guardian request for comment.The citation failures come as Kennedy, a noted skeptic of vaccines, criticized medical publishing this week, branding top journals the Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine and Jama as “corrupt” and alleging they were controlled by pharmaceutical companies. He outlined plans for creating government-run journals instead.Beyond the phantom studies in Kennedy’s report, Notus found it systematically misrepresented existing research.For example, one paper was claimed to show that talking therapy was as effective as psychiatric medication, but the statistician Joanne McKenzie said this was impossible, as “we did not include psychotherapy” in the review.The sleep researcher Mariana G Figueiro also said her study was mischaracterized, with the report incorrectly stating it involved children rather than college students, and citing the wrong journal entirely.The Trump administration asked Kennedy for the report in order to look at chronic illness causes, from pesticides to mobile phone radiation. Kennedy called it a “milestone” that provides “evidence-based foundation” for sweeping policy changes.A follow-up “Make our children healthy again strategy” report is due in August, raising concerns about the scientific credibility underpinning the administration’s health agenda. More
