RFK Jr.: The 'Theory' and Practice of a Kook

Two posts on the "theory" and practice of the head of HHS have come to my attention this morning.

The first, at Ars Technica, is the more shocking to me, because as loony as I know Bobby Kennedy to be, I never in a million years would have guessed that he rejects the germ theory of disease in favor of what he incorrectly calls the miasma theory of disease.

To be fair, it does help in a big way to understand the nuttiness. The below passage includes quotes from Kennedy's book, The Real Anthony Fauci:

In the chapter [titled "The White Man's Burden"], Kennedy promotes the "miasma theory" but gets the definition completely wrong. Instead of actual miasma theory, he describes something more like terrain theory. He writes: "'Miasma theory' emphasizes preventing disease by fortifying the immune system through nutrition and by reducing exposures to environmental toxins and stresses."

Kennedy contrasts his erroneous take on miasma theory with germ theory, which he derides as a tool of the pharmaceutical industry and pushy scientists to justify selling modern medicines. The abandonment of miasma theory, Kennedy bemoans, realigned health and medical institutions to "the pharmaceutical paradigm that emphasized targeting particular germs with specific drugs rather than fortifying the immune system through healthy living, clean water, and good nutrition."

According to Kennedy, germ theory gained popularity, not because of the undisputed evidence supporting it, but by "mimicking the traditional explanation for disease -- demon possession -- giving it a leg up over miasma [sic]."

To this day, Kennedy writes, a "$1 trillion pharmaceutical industry pushing patented pills, powders, pricks, potions, and poisons, and the powerful professions of virology and vaccinology led by 'Little Napoleon' himself, Anthony Fauci, fortify the century-old predominance of germ theory." [bold added]

There's the theory. Elsewhere, Derek Lowe presents another of many installments on how the practice -- abetted by improper government -- is panning out. Then, he provides an apt summary of where things stand in parallel with our nation's foolish experiment with the equally discredited theory of mercantilism:

The situation is very close to what's happening with US trade and the economy in general. We're just starting to feel the tremors from this administration's idiotic, destructive, historically wrongheaded tariff policies, and over the next couple of months that's going to get worse and worse. Because of the timing of shipping and the supply chains involved that'll be the case even if the president were to wake up tomorrow and rescind all of it, which I would not hold my breath waiting for. Right now we're at the split-second where you bang some part of your body against a hard object and have just enough time to realize that it's going to hurt. And people are going to have to hear about just why this is happening and who did it to them.

So it is with US scientific research, but on a longer, slower scale. When you cut the funds, deny the grants, fire the scientists, harass the grad students and postdocs who have come from overseas to participate in the greatest scientific infrastructure the world has ever seen, well ... what do you expect to happen? Just as with all those cargo ships, even if you suddenly woke up and tried to take it all back, immense damage has already been done, and the longer it goes on the harder it will be to get things moving again. People have left, and more will leave. Instruments and facilities are being shut down. Supplies don't get ordered. New hires and new students just don't get taken on, and the projects wither no matter how hard you try. In the months and years to come, the signs of this horrible fit of self-destruction will be clear to see in the US research world, and I just hope that we are able to eventually work our way back to what we had just a few months ago. But there is no guarantee of that, is there?

On top of the damage itself being hard to repair, our country is going to suffer severe reputational damage absent someone responsible coming in after Trump and limiting the ability of any future President to single-handedly upend things this way again. Otherwise, even if we could substantially repair the damage, what businessman -- or future scientist from abroad -- would, in his right mind, risk his time and treasure on dealing with a nation led by crackpots?

-- CAV

Updates

5-9-25: Corrected typo in link to Derek Lowe piece.