
Seed Oils, UPFs, And Carni-Bros: Is RFK Making America Healthy Again?
RFK Jr is not just bringing back infectious diseases like measles. Our top health official is working hard to back diet-related diseases like obesity, diabetes, and heart attacks. During his first three months in office, RFK, Jr. has made three big pronouncements about what Americans should eat. The first is important but for the wrong reasons. The second builds on the fallacies of the first. And the third goes against 60 plus years of scientific evidence.
RFK is not wrong if he is referring to ultra-processed foods (or UPFs). A recent study found that those who ate more UPFs were more likely to show early symptoms of Parkinson's disease and a review study linked UPFs to higher risk of dying from heart disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and mental health outcomes including anxiety and sleeping difficulties.
UPFs are made from multiple ingredients including additives like colorants, flavor enhancers, and preservatives. They contain high amounts of sugars, salt, and fats, which makes them hyper-palatable, or simply tasty. And they are cheap, readily available (witness the local gas station convenience store), and handy to eat. Unfortunately for the consumer, a review of studies with a combined population of over 1 million, found that for each 10% increase in UPF consumption, your risk of mortality increases by 10%.
Why are UPFs unhealthy? Many people eschew the long list of 'chemicals' on the ingredient labels of everything from Wheaties to Fritos. One type of ingredient--food dyes--can have negative health effects and are associated with hyperactivity in children. In fact, MAHA hopes to ban food dyes in UPFs like soft drinks and Fruit Loops. Yet I haven't heard MAHA alerting us to the high levels of salt, sugar, and saturated fat in UPFs… all things that have been shown over and over to contribute to chronic diseases like high blood pressure, diabetes, and cancer.
Dr Kevin Hall, who worked as a nutrition researcher at NIH for 21 years, found that people on an ultra-processed diet consumed about 500 more calories per day, which could explain why UPFs are associated with type 2 diabetes and obesity. But what explains why UPF consumers gobble up more calories? Dr Hall thinks energy density might be the culprit. Simply put, a chocolate chip cookie packs a lot more calories into every bite than a banana. So eating that ultra processed chocolate chip cookie means eating more calories per bite compared to eating fruit and other less processed foods. Not to mention that the sugar, salt and fat taste good… making me want to eat 4 or 5 chocolate chip cookies instead of one banana.
The preliminary results of Dr Hall's recent study, which he posted on X, show that the high energy density and the irresistible taste of salt, sugar, and fat explain why people on high UPF diets eat more calories. But don't expect to see the final results of this important study published anytime soon. Turns out Dr Hall took early retirement at 54 yrs old from his research position at NIH. Why? Because the MAHA administration forced him to withdraw his name from a paper on UPFs that mentioned 'health equity'--or the difficulties some groups have accessing healthy food. The administration also took away the money Dr Hall needed to continue his UPF research, censored his media access, and even incorrectly edited his response to a NY Times inquiry. Just as we were on the brink of understanding why UPFs are making us sick, one of the world's leading UPF scientists is out. Hard to see how lack of scientific information is Making Americans Healthy Again.
While dining on fries and a double cheeseburger at Steak N Shake with Fox News's Sean Hannity, Kennedy touted French fries cooked in beef tallow.
To be sure, consuming a lot of seed oils raises health concerns, including that they contain few nutrients, are often highly processed, and some, like soybean oil, might contain unhealthy amounts of omega 6 acids. But, are seed oils worse than saturated animal fats? Seed oils, unlike animal fats, are mostly unsaturated.
And in a 2025 study, participants with the highest intake of butter, which similar to beef tallow is largely saturated animal fat, had a 15% higher total mortality whereas those with the highest intake of total plant-based oil (olive, soybean and canola) were 16% less likely to die. About ⅓ of the deaths were due to cancer, about a third to cardiovascular disease, and a third other causes. The authors conclude:
In short, if you have to choose between seed oils and animal fat, you are probably better off with seed oils, or even better, extra virgin olive oil (EVOO). But, you should avoid consuming too much of any sort of oil or fat, which brings us to the third RFK Jr pronouncement.
At a public event to promote MAHA in West Virginia, RFK Jr body shamed Governor Patrick Morrisey for his weight.
MAHA seems to be at the forefront of the next culture war: dump plant-based foods and become a 'carni-bro.' Yet a comprehensive review of studies on foods and obesity concluded:
How do UPFs compare to red meat? The only study I found comparing the two found people eating UPFs had an approximately 14% greater chance of dying whereas those who ate red meat had an approximately 8% chance of death over the same time period. (Those eating other types of meats like chicken and pork and fish did not have a greater chance of dying.) But this study was conducted with Seventh Day Adventists, whose meat consumption was way lower than the average American (while their UPF consumption was fairly typical of the US). People in West Virginia, whose governor is in fact rotund, are by far and away the biggest consumer of hotdogs in the US, at 481 hot dogs per person per year.
In a recent UK study with a more typical population, every added 70 g of red meat and processed meat (like ham, hotdogs, bacon, and deli meats) per day was associated with a 15% higher risk of coronary heart disease and a 30% higher risk of diabetes. Because red and processed meat consumption is also associated with higher rates of cancer, the World Cancer Research Fund recommends limiting red meat to no more than three portions per week and avoiding processed meat altogether.
According to the CDC, heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US, accounting for one in five deaths, or one death every 33 seconds. Heart disease cost the US about $252.2 billion from 2019 to 2020. And if you look at a map of where heart disease is more common, it looks uncannily like a map of MAHA supporters (including in West Virginia).
.
The first items in a list of CDC recommendations for preventing heart disease are all about food: Choose healthy meals and snacks high in fiber and limit saturated and trans fats, salt, and sugar. This sounds like a recipe for avoiding UPFs. But it could also be a recipe for substituting whole grains and fruit and vegetables for red and processed meats, which punch the double whammy of being meat and UPFs.
Let's celebrate Kennedy's move away from UPFs, an important step toward improving Americans' health. But why does our top health official publicly tout beef tallow, French fries, and double cheeseburgers, when we know that Americans' consumption of saturated fat and meat lead to obesity, diabetes, cancer, and heart disease? Or has he weighed in on ultra-processed meats, like Slim Jim's, which with sales at $3 billion last year is America's fastest growing snack?
It's hard to understand what is going on in RFK's brain. He gloms on to a limited number of studies suggesting health risks of eating seed oils, while ignoring saturated fats and even encouraging Americans to eat fast foods. He wants to rout out corruption in the food and pharmaceutical industry, yet uses his position to sell Make America Tallow Again hats and T-shirts. He says he believes climate change poses an existential threat, yet on his second day in office eliminated funding for research on heat waves, indoor mold after flooding, and other NIH climate change and health programs. And in his big May report on children's health, he ignores the largest causes of death for those under 19--gun violence and accidents. Raise your hand if you want Secretary Kennedy to conduct a public truth-telling once a month.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
The Benefits And Drawbacks Of RFK Jr.'s New COVID Vaccine Recommendations
SAVANNAH, GA - DECEMBER 15: A nurse shows off a vial of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine ... More outside of the Chatham County Health Department on December 15, 2020 in Savannah, Georgia. (Photo by) RFK Jr. and the HHS will no longer recommend annual COVID-19 vaccines for healthy pregnant women and young adults, according to a video announcement posted on X May 27 by Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. A few days later, the CDC took a slightly different stance and stated that children between the ages of 6 months and 17 years may get the COVID-19 vaccine through shared decision-making between parents and healthcare providers. The CDC also updated the adult immunization schedule to say there is 'no guidance' on use for pregnancy. These decisions have sparked much debate among public health experts, policymakers and government officials. Here are the pros and cons of such a policy shift. As Kennedy cited in his video announcement, the U.S. seems to be aligning its vaccine policy with other countries such as the U.K. and Australia that have stopped recommending routine COVID-19 vaccines for young healthy adults. In addition, according to the new recommendations, the focus of vaccinations will largely be on high-risk populations, namely those who are 65 years of age and older as well as younger individuals with at least one medical condition that puts them at high risk for COVID-19. This could allow resources and attention to be redirected to the populations that need the vaccine most. The new recommendations also demand evidence in answering important questions the public deserves to know. For younger healthy American adults, getting approval for the vaccine will require placebo-controlled trials to show a benefit for that particular population. As an example, does a healthy 31-year-old male with no medical problems need to get a COVID-19 booster every single year, even after having received several COVID-19 boosters in the past? These are the types of questions that all Americans would like to and deserve to know with respect to COVID vaccinations. On the flip side, the new recommendations have many public health experts concerned. Pregnant healthy females could be barred from getting the COVID-19 vaccine, since the CDC has failed to provide guidance on the issue. Without a strong recommendation from the CDC, many pregnant patients could face real barriers from insurance companies to cover the vaccine, according to The New York Times. Pregnant women are at high risk for COVID infection and complications because pregnancy results in a weakened immune system. As Dr. Steven Fleischman, President of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states, 'The science has not changed. It is very clear that COVID infection during pregnancy can be catastrophic and lead to major disability.' The new recommendations could harm vulnerable populations. In addition to potential decreased vaccination rates and adverse outcomes for pregnant females, children could also suffer. When pregnant females get vaccinated against COVID-19 in the third trimester, they are able to pass along antibodies and protection to their infants, who have not developed mature immune systems. If pregnant females do not get vaccinated, infants will lack these antibodies and could then go on to develop severe complications from the virus should they get infected. Finally, the new recommendations could limit access to the vaccine to those that want it. Private insurance companies usually require FDA approval and CDC recommendations to cover the vaccine as part of health insurance. The current CDC recommendations simply state young children may get the vaccine with shared-decision making, not outright stating that they should get the vaccine. In addition, the CDC falls short in explicitly recommending the vaccine for pregnant females. This could prevent private insurance companies from fully covering the vaccine. Ultimately, this may mean some pregnant women and those that cannot afford the vaccine may not have access to it. The new recommendations for the COVID-19 vaccine for children and pregnant females was made without the customary use of independent advisors, and could have important implications for public health. While aligning with international practices, the move could significantly limit the amount of vaccines available for millions of Americans.


CNN
32 minutes ago
- CNN
New research presents promising findings on colorectal cancer treatment and prevention
Colorectal cancer is the second most common cause of cancer deaths in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society. This year, the organization estimates that more than 150,000 Americans will be diagnosed with it and nearly 53,000 will die from it. New studies presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, or ASCO, in the last few days offer promising findings for both pharmaceutical and lifestyle interventions, including the impact of diet and exercise. Diagnoses of colorectal cancer have been decreasing overall for decades, the American Cancer Society says, thanks in large part to better screening. But case rates are rising among younger adults, and research estimates that colorectal cancer will become the leading cause of cancer death among adults ages 20 to 49 by 2030. Earlier research has suggested that regular exercise can improve survival rates for colorectal cancer patients, and a new study – published in the New England Journal of Medicine and presented at the ASCO conference on Sunday – confirmed those findings with robust clinical trial data. Between 2009 and 2024, researchers followed nearly 900 colon cancer patients who had completed chemotherapy – half of whom received an informational booklet that encouraged them to adopt a healthy lifestyle with good nutrition and exercise the other half of whom were also matched with a physical activity consultant for three years. They found that there was a 28% reduction in the risk of recurrence or new cancer for patients on the exercise program, with a five-year disease-free survival rate of 80% for the group with an exercise consultant compared with 74% for the group who just received the booklet. In other words, the exercise program was found to prevent 1 out of every 16 patients from developing recurrent or new cancer. 'That magnitude is comparable to – and in many cases exceeds – the magnitude of benefit offered by a lot of our very good standard cancer drugs,' said Dr. Christopher Booth, a professor of oncology with Queen's University and co-author of the new study. 'Exercise really should be considered an essential component of treatment of colon cancer.' Work is still being done to understand why exercise can help reduce the risk of cancer, but experts say that it may have something to do with the ways exercise helps reduce inflammation in the body. Another new study presented at the ASCO conference on Sunday found that anti-inflammatory diets also helped improve survival rates for people with stage 3 colon cancer. Patients who consumed more anti-inflammatory diets – including coffee, tea and vegetables such as leafy greens – and engaged in higher levels of physical activity had a 63% lower risk of death compared to patients who consumed the most inflammatory diets – including things like red meat, processed meat, refined grains and sugar-sweetened beverages – and engaged in lower levels of physical activity, the study found. 'Actively, as a field, we're learning about the role of the immune system in cancer development, and inflammation is an immune response,' said Dr. Sara Char, a clinical fellow in Hematology and Oncology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and lead author of the study, and the rise of colorectal cancer cases in younger people suggests it's a critical piece of the puzzle. 'When we look at the incidence of colon cancer in younger individuals … that really suggests to us that there is something in the environment – either in the foods we eat, our lifestyles, the chemicals that could be in our foods, all sorts of different things – that are outside of just genetics alone that could be driving these rates,' she said. 'So it is incredibly important for us, as a field, to be thinking about how our diet and lifestyle impacts not just our risk of developing this cancer, but then how people fare after it.' Both Booth and Char said that colorectal cancer patients are often seeking ways to proactively manage their risk. 'I think that's it's very empowering for patients,' Booth said. 'It's also achievable for patients. This is a commitment, but it's something that patients can achieve.' In his study, an 'exercise prescription' was developed based on each individual's starting point. Most people were able to reach their target increase if they went for a brisk walk for about an hour three or four days per week, Booth said. Lifestyle interventions like exercise and diet are also 'sustainable for health systems,' he said, but it's key that the system helps support patients in accessing the resources needed for behavioral interventions. Another new study showed promising results that might represent a new standard-of-care for certain patients with advanced colon cancer. On Friday, drugmaker Pfizer presented data on a colorectal cancer drug, Braftovi, used in combination with a standard chemotherapy and an antibody drug. During the trial, the drug combo was shown to double the length of time patients with an aggressive form of colorectal cancer lived with treatment: an average of 30 months compared with 15 months using currently available treatments. Braftovi targets a mutation in a specific protein that can lead to abnormal cell growth, and it's already approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat some forms of cancer. The study, which was funded by Pfizer, published Friday in the New England Journal of Medicine. 'It's a targeted cancer therapy that really depends on knowing what's driving patients' cancer,' Pfizer CEO Dr. Albert Bourla told CNN. These targeted therapies are one of the biggest advancements in cancer treatment over the past two decades, he said, and it's easy to diagnose whether cancer patients have the specific mutation that Braftovi can treat. The latest data on treatment for colorectal cancer a 'very, very important finding,' Bourla said, and the drugmaker plans to seek additional approval to add the new indication to the drug's label.


Associated Press
38 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Research Presented by The US Oncology Network at ASCO 2025 Demonstrates Significant Cost Savings in Community Oncology Setting with Pharmacist-Driven Interventions
THE WOODLANDS, Texas--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jun 1, 2025-- To address the rising costs of cancer drugs, investigators from The US Oncology Network (The Network), the largest organization of its kind dedicated to advancing local cancer care and better patient outcomes, explored the impact of engaging a remote clinical pharmacist in reducing the total cost of care (TCOC) within the Enhancing Oncology Model (EOM) from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). From July 1, 2023, to December 31, 2024, seven ClinReview pharmacists (CRPs) within five EOM-participating practices in The Network evaluated more than 5,600 patients for medication initiatives. During the same period, The Network had 12 practices in the EOM nationwide, accounting for approximately 50% of all providers participating in the program. A total of 1,271 interventions were identified, with 1,180 accepted. The sum of TCOC reduction amounted to $8,982,235. Six medication initiatives were implemented and the breakdown of each initiative and average TCOC reduction per intervention are shown in the table below and will be presented in a rapid oral presentation at the 2025 American Society of Clinical Oncology ( ASCO ) Annual Meeting: In addition to the six medication initiatives outlined above, the CRPs contributed an additional $1,201,326 in medication savings associated with drug selection. 'With the national cost of cancer care estimated to exceed $245 billion by 2030, this study provides a clear roadmap for oncology practices looking to reduce costs and improve patient outcomes,' said lead author Daniel Kendzierski, PharmD, senior clinical pharmacist, The Network. 'These findings underscore the critical role of pharmacist-driven medication interventions in driving the success of value-based care models in oncology.' Study Methodology Medication initiatives were clinically evaluated and adopted at an individual practice level and included moAB dose rounding, pembrolizumab dose banding, biosimilar TIC to preferred products, use of a preferred PD-1 agent in metastatic NSCLC, decreased upfront usage of long-acting GF in metastatic cancer, and preferred use of zoledronic acid over alternatives. CRPs remotely reviewed oncology treatment orders for cost-savings opportunities, updated eligible treatments per practice protocols, or reviewed with the treating oncologist. Interventions were submitted by the CRPs into a tracking system and marked as an EOM-related intervention. TCOC reduction was calculated using the difference between the CMS allowable for the original treatment ordered and the new order. Other Research at ASCO 2025 Physicians in The Network are affiliated with dozens of studies being presented at ASCO 2025. Their research highlights clinical and operational findings covering key topics such as the impact of AI on care delivery, access to oncology resources for minority patient populations, and patient experiences with novel therapies. 'As cancer care costs continue to escalate, community oncology practices need novel therapies and innovative solutions to deliver high-quality, affordable care,' said Leslie Busby, MD, Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committee chair and incoming chief medical officer, The Network. 'Research presented at this year's ASCO around digital transformation and patient care delivery in community settings highlights the direct impact practices in The Network have on the communities they serve. This research helps inform how we can continue driving value-based care forward and improving cancer care for all oncology patients.' The Network is supported by McKesson, which has an unmatched portfolio of oncology businesses and partners that provide research, insights, technologies, and services that are helping address barriers and improve cancer and specialty care. At ASCO, McKesson-supported businesses including The Network, Ontada, and Sarah Cannon Research Institute (SCRI), are part of approximately 170 accepted abstracts and presentations. These are inclusive of oral and poster presentations, educational sessions, late-breaking studies, and early-phase studies. Click here for a full list of SCRI-affiliated studies and presentations and here for Ontada-affiliated abstracts. Expert Panel on Precision Medicine in Community Oncology during ASCO 2025 Additionally, McKesson will be participating in a thought leadership panel hosted by Endpoints News on June 4, 2025, at 12:10pm ET, titled, 'The Future is Now: Digital Transformation Unleashes Precision Medicine in Community Oncology.' Click here to register and join the panelists as they share their insights and perspectives on actionable steps and solutions for community oncology practices to seamlessly integrate precision medicine into their care offerings: ### About The US Oncology Network Every day, The US Oncology Network (The Network) helps more than 2,700 independent providers deliver value-based, integrated care to patients — close to home. Through The Network, these independent doctors come together to form a community of shared expertise and resources dedicated to advancing local cancer care and to delivering better patient outcomes. The Network provides practices with access to coordinated resources, best business practices, and the experience, infrastructure, and support of McKesson Corporation. This collaboration allows the providers in The Network to focus on the health of their patients, while McKesson focuses on the health of their practices. The Network is committed to the success of independent practices, everywhere. About McKesson Oncology and Specialty Solutions It's an unprecedented time for patients living with cancer as life sciences companies race to create new, cutting-edge therapies. With cancer care becoming more targeted, providers, life sciences companies, and payers face a multitude of challenges and complexity in the development of new treatments and making them accessible to patients in need. At McKesson, our unmatched portfolio of oncology businesses and partners provide research, insights, technologies, and services that are helping to address these hurdles and improve cancer and specialty care. View source version on CONTACT: Media Contact The US Oncology Network Claire Crye, Communications [email protected] Health on behalf of The US Oncology Network Christine Murphy, Media Relations [email protected] KEYWORD: TEXAS UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: HEALTH PHARMACEUTICAL PRACTICE MANAGEMENT MANAGED CARE ONCOLOGY SOURCE: The US Oncology Network Copyright Business Wire 2025. PUB: 06/01/2025 08:00 AM/DISC: 06/01/2025 08:01 AM