Can RFK Jr. Save Americans’ Health?

By admin On Feb 3, 2025

The task that RFK Jr. has set for himself is huge: nothing less, it appears, than a revolution in the health of the American people. If successful, or even partially successful, Kennedy’s efforts would spare tens of millions of Americans from needless suffering and early death. His efforts could also help to save many billions in Medicare and Medicaid spending.

As director of Health and Human Services, Kennedy would enjoy great power to allocate funds (an estimated $1.7 trillion), set standards (such as the government “food pyramid” and school lunch programs), limit SNAP spending to healthier items, fund research, and promote public education. Whether or not all of this would lead to a “revolution” in America’s health is another question.

In what has been described as a “contentious” Senate confirmation hearing, RFK Jr. rejected the idea that he is “anti-vaccine,” portrayed his views on abortion as mainstream, parried questions on Medicare and Medicaid, and stated that he supports further drug price negotiations under the Inflation Reduction Act. Repeatedly, Kennedy insisted that he would support the Trump administration’s policies on sensitive issues.

It appears that most if not all Democrats plan to vote against Kennedy’s confirmation, and Kennedy has met fierce opposition as well from powerful food lobbyists.

Someone, perhaps the huge P.R. arm of the food industry, is circulating stories online about all the foods that RFK Jr. intends to “ban.” These range from candy bars to pizza to Coca-Cola. I doubt if RFK would have the authority to “ban” these common foods even if he wished to, though he might exert influence in order to make many products healthier and force changes in additives and preservatives. But it is not likely that he will be able to transform the American diet in a few short years.

Certainly Kennedy will face opposition from food lobbies, including those lobbying for prepared foods as well as dairy, meat, eggs, and fish. In 1992, the U.S. government published its first “food pyramid,” and ever since, food lobbyists have exerted influence. The pyramid has changed over the past 33 years to reflect food research into the role of diet in heart health, cancer, diabetes, and other diseases, but the inclusion of such items as meat, dairy, eggs, and fish has not changed.

Government dietary guidelines go far beyond the food pyramid, and lobbyists exert influence at every point. According to HHS and the Department of Agriculture, the guidelines “are grounded in the most current scientific evidence.” Yet, according to Markham Heid, writing in Time online, “a number of leading nutrition experts — including some tasked by the government to advise it on the latest research — say the guidelines are influenced too much by food manufacturers, food producers, and special interest groups.”

Food lobbyists will not discontinue their efforts just because a Kennedy takes charge at HHS. If anything, it seems likely that they will double down on lobbying, advertising, and research. Between 2019 and 2023, food lobbyists spent some $500 million in the U.S. This figure is significant, but it pales in comparison with the $3.1 billion that the food industry spent in 2023 alone on advertising. This amount will undoubtedly be much higher in 2025, since it has been climbing every year. RFK Jr. may attempt to educate the public, and education is long overdue, but he faces a determined and well funded adversary.

Altogether, U.S. food spending totals $1.6 trillion, which is more than ten percent of total consumer spending. An industry of that size is not going to roll over and play dead. T. Colin Campbell’s account of his experience with the food lobby in books such as The China Study, Whole, and The Future of Nutrition suggests just how difficult Kennedy’s task will be.

Still, Kennedy can and should attempt to change the American diet because, along with many other Western countries, America faces a health crisis that derives mostly from problems with diet and exercise. The obesity rate for American adults is 42% (as of 2020). The rate of heart disease in the U.S. is 5.5%, with heart disease causing one in five deaths, and the U.S. cancer rate is 45% over the course of a lifetime. (The good news is that for cancer, the mortality rate dropped by 27.5% between 2001 and 2021 due to early detection, lower smoking rates, and other factors.)

The decline in U.S. cancer deaths over the past 25 years is highly significant, but it has not resulted from government regulation. Individuals made the choice to give up smoking. But that reduction in smoking has taken decades: smoking has been linked to cancer and heart disease for a long time, but it is only in the last 20 years that smoking rates have seen major reduction. Except within a few localities (including some Adventist communities), tobacco sales remain legal, but individuals, acting on their own free will, have chosen not to smoke, and cancer deaths have declined.

It seems unlikely that a government ban on colored cereals or regulation of soft drink sizes (as attempted in NYC) will greatly improve the health of U.S. children or adults. What can bring change is the same factor that lowered cancer rates: individual choice. Already tens of millions of Americans have turned to healthier diets in order to lose weight and improve their health.

One of the most important recent dietary changes has been the adoption of the Mediterranean diet. By one measure, 85% of Americans “favor” the Mediterranean diet, which, if followed shows documented reductions in cancer and heart deaths and a 23% lower risk of all-cause mortality.

Clearly, Americans are leaning in the right direction, but this does not mean they are actually following through on a healthy diet. Americans consume between 2 and 4 billion pounds of chips annually. They spend between 7 and 10 percent of their food dollars on sweetened sodas, and they spend much of their grocery budget on prepared foods. In addition, most Americans consume fast food at least once a week. Changing these habits will be a monumental task, and it cannot come about via government bans or mandates.

The question is whether changing personal habits is the proper role of government. Regardless of how great the problem may be — and 43% obesity is a problem — banning or forcing manufacturers to change ingredients will have only a marginal effect. The greatest change will come about when the public truly recognizes the damage of poor diet and exercise and decides to make a change. Just as it did with smoking, this process of recognition and change may take decades.

In the meantime, what is RFK Jr. to do?

I believe Kennedy is sincere in his concerns, and I believe there is reason to be concerned, but no one’s health has ever been improved by government lectures on diet. Public education may help, but changing one’s diet comes down to individual choice.

Jeffrey Folks is the author of many books and articles on American culture.