Fact-Checking Health Claims in Kennedy's 2nd Day of Confirmation Hearings
Here is a running list of key health claims, fact-checked by our reporters.
Prioritizing chronic disease
'There has never been an H.H.S. secretary who came in to do this,' Mr. Kennedy said, answering a question about his goal of focusing on fighting chronic disease as secretary for health and human services.
Research into chronic disease has been a major focus of the National Institutes of Health, an agency under the H.H.S. umbrella, for many years.
The N.I.H. spends tens of billions of dollars on research into chronic diseases, operating institutes dedicated to studying diabetes, obesity, neurological disorders and heart disease.
Furthermore, the Biden administration championed a cancer 'moonshot' program to fund research into cancer, one of the most common chronic diseases.
Covid-19 in Children
Mr. Kennedy asserted for the second day in a row that Covid does not pose a risk to young children. Senator Rand Paul echoed those statements, saying that no healthy children had died from Covid.
That is incorrect: While children with underlying health conditions are at greatest risk from the illness, those without chronic conditions have still died from the virus.
A study published in the fall examined 183 cases of children who died from Covid between 2020 and 2022, and found that around one-third of these children did not have another medical condition beyond Covid at their time of death. Between 2021 and 2022, Covid was the eighth leading cause of death among children in the United States.
'Nobody would dispute that you want to address one of the leading causes of death,' said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, who emphasized that the risk Covid posed to children was 'really not zero.'
Data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also showed that in 2023, more than 100 children in the United States developed Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children, or MIS-C, a rare but serious condition that typically occurs weeks after a Covid infection.
The vast majority of MIS-C cases were in children who were eligible to be vaccinated, but were not. Roughly 1 to 2 percent of those children have died, according to the C.D.C.
Diabetes and Children
Mr. Kennedy said diabetes rates were rising among children. That's true.
It was a correction of statements he has made in the past that 48 percent of teenagers in the country are diabetic. That number is wrong by orders of magnitude. For instance, Type 2 diabetes occurs in 0.35 percent of Americans under the age of 20, according to the American Diabetes Association.
Hepatitis B Vaccinations
Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, cast doubt about the hepatitis B vaccines, questioning whether infants need protection against a virus that is often sexually transmitted.
'You're telling my kid to take a hepatitis B vaccine when he's 1 day old,' he said. 'That's not science.'
Mr. Kennedy did not respond to Mr. Paul's statement. But, in fact, the vaccine is given to infants because their mothers can pass it to their babies. Hospitals often don't test pregnant women for it.
The infection, which can lead to permanent liver damage and cancer, used to infect about 18,000 children each year, about half of them at birth.
Since vaccination became routine, hepatitis B has become extremely rare among U.S. children.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
9 minutes ago
- New York Post
Goodbye to DEI, crushed by the weight of its own hypocrisies
President Donald Trump's executive orders banning diversity, equity and inclusion-related racial and gender preferencing have ostensibly doomed the DEI industry. But DEI was already on its last legs. Half of all Americans no longer approve of racial, ethnic or gender preferences. Advertisement DEI had enjoyed a surge following the death of George Floyd and the subsequent 120 days of nonstop rioting, arson, assaults, killings and attacks on law enforcement during the summer of 2020. In those chaotic years, DEI was seen as the answer to racial tensions. DEI had insidiously replaced the old notion of affirmative action — a 1960s-era government remedy for historical prejudices against black Americans, from the legacy of slavery to Jim Crow segregation. But during the Obama era, 'diversity' superseded affirmative action by offering preferences to many groups well beyond black Americans. Advertisement Quite abruptly, Americans began talking in Marxist binaries. On one side were the supposed 65 to 70% white majority 'oppressors' and 'victimizers' — often stereotyped as exuding 'white privilege,' 'white supremacy' or even 'white rage.' They were juxtaposed to the 30 to 35% of 'diverse' Americans, the so-called 'oppressed' and 'victimized.' Advertisement Yet almost immediately, contradictions and hypocrisies undermined DEI. First, how does one define 'diverse' in an increasingly multiracial, intermarried, assimilated and integrated society? DNA badges? The old one-drop rule of the antebellum South? Superficial appearance? To establish racial or ethnic proof of being one-sixteenth, one-fourth, or one-half 'non-white,' employers, corporations and universities would have to become racially obsessed genealogists. Advertisement Yet refusing to become racial auditors also would allow racial and ethnic fraudsters — like Sen. Elizabeth Warren and the would-be mayor of New York, Zohran Mamdani — to go unchecked. Warren falsely claimed Native American heritage to leverage a Harvard professorship. Mamdani, an immigrant son of wealthy Indian immigrants from Uganda, tried to game his way into college by claiming he was African American. Second, in 21st-century America, class became increasingly divergent from race. Mamdani, who promises to tax 'affluent' and 'whiter' neighborhoods at higher rates, is himself the child of Indian immigrants, the most affluent ethnic group in America. Why would the children of Barack Obama, Joy Reid or LeBron James need any special preferences, given the multimillionaire status of their parents? In other words, one's superficial appearance no longer necessarily determines one's income or wealth, nor defines 'privilege' or lack thereof. Third, DEI is often tied to questions of 'reparations.' The current white majority supposedly owes other particular groups financial or entitlement compensation for the sins of the past. Advertisement Yet in today's multiracial and multiethnic society, in which over 50 million residents were not born in the United States and many have only recently arrived, what are the particular historical or past grievances that would earn anyone special treatment? What injustices can recent arrivals from southern Mexico, South Korea or Chad claim, knowing little about, and experiencing no firsthand bias from, Americans, the United States, or its history? Is the DEI logic that when a Guatemalan steps one foot across the southern border, she is suddenly classified as a victim of white oppression and therefore entitled to preferences in hiring or employment? Fourth, does the word 'minority' still carry any currency? Advertisement In today's California, the demography breaks down as 40% Latino, 34% white, 16% Asian American or Pacific Islander, 6% black, and 3% Other — with no significant majority and fewer whites than the Latino 'minority.' Are Latinos the new de facto 'majority' and 'whites' just one of the four other 'minorities?' Do the other minorities, then, have grievances against Latinos, given that they are the dominant population in the state? Fifth, when does DEI 'proportional representation' apply, and when does it not? Are whites 'overrepresented' among the nation's university faculties, reportedly 75% white, when they comprise only about 70% of the population? Advertisement Or, are whites 'underrepresented' as college students, making up just 55% of them, and thus in need of DEI action to bump up their numbers? Black athletes are vastly overrepresented in lucrative and prestigious professional sports. To correct such asymmetries, should Asians and Hispanics be given mandated quotas for quarterback or point-guard positions to ensure proper athletic 'diversity, equity and inclusion'? Sixth, DEI determines good and bad prejudices, as well as correct and incorrect biases. 'Affinity' segregationist graduations — black, Hispanic, Asian and gay — are considered 'affirming'. Advertisement But would a similar affinity graduation ceremony for European-Americans or Jews be considered 'racist'? Is a Latino-themed, de facto segregated house on a California campus considered 'enlightened,' while a European-American dorm would be condemned as incendiary? In truth, DEI long ago became corrupt, falling apart under the weight of its own paradoxes and hypocrisies. It is a perniciously divisive idea — unable to define who qualifies for preference or why, who is overrepresented or not, or when bias is acceptable or unjust. And it is past time that it goes away. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Claiming to fight waste, Trump administration slashes potentially cost-saving research
Harvard researchers had spent five years and some $3.8 million from the National Institutes of Health trying to answer this question when Mueller heard that the study might never yield results. In May, amid a feud with the university, the Trump administration abruptly terminated the grant that was funding it with one year and some $734,000 still to go. Without that time and money, pulmonologist Mary Berlik Rice and her team couldn't collect the final bits of data or analyze what they'd found. The clinical trial needed outcomes from a minimum number of participants to be able to conclude anything with any statistical significance. Advertisement 'It's a waste,' said Mueller — of taxpayer money, of everyone's time, of blood and tissue samples. N. Mueller sat beside the air purifier he was loaned as part of the study, which may or may not be functional. Lucy Lu for STAT That alone might seem to conflict with President Trump's stated goal of fighting 'waste, fraud, and abuse.' But scientists and participants like Mueller see another irony. The entire premise of this sort of study is that it might curb future waste. Advertisement It's a pillar of public health: Healthier people cost less. Figure out what could keep them well, and the government money spent on the discovery may well be dwarfed by the amount saved in hospitalizations and prescriptions averted. One of the most famous examples involves central venous catheters, thin tubes that intensive care doctors put into a patient's neck, chest, or groin to give fluids and medications or to draw blood. Those lines allow access to the bloodstream — but also pose an infection risk, creating a conduit that bacteria can take from the outside world into the veins. Such complications were both scary and common. In the early 2000s, they killed some 28,000 American ICU patients and cost $2.3 billion dollars every year. But then in 2006, a paper came out showing that the infections were avoidable. Led by intensive care specialist Peter Pronovost, a team of researchers tried out a simple solution in Michigan hospitals, instituting a checklist of risk-reducing hacks. These included clinicians washing their hands before inserting central lines; cleaning the patient's skin with a disinfectant called chlorhexidine; wearing sterile hair-coverings, masks, gowns, and gloves; using blood vessels in the neck or chest rather than the groin; and taking out catheters when they were no longer needed. Duh, you might say. But the infection rate fell dramatically. Within 18 months, it was near zero, and the intervention was estimated to have saved $100 million and 1,500 lives. 'I don't know how to describe how jaw-dropping this was,' said Leora Horwitz, a hospitalist in New York who studies how health care can be improved. 'This was like a shockwave of a paper.' Advertisement Pronovost says none of that could have happened without a grant of $500,000 a year for two years from a federal bureau called the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which is dedicated to improving the delivery of medical care to patients and represents about 0.04 percent of the government's spending on health care. 'AHRQ pays for itself over and over again with studies like that,' said Horwitz. But the agency hasn't been spared in the Trump administration's slashing of federal research funding and the employees who administer it. Over a third of its employees were laid off in April, and the administration said it would be merged with another office within the Department of Health and Human Services. The effects of such cutbacks have been felt in the last few weeks. 'As a result of recent reduction in force at HHS, AHRQ's grants management staff were separated from Federal service on July 14, 2025,' one of the agency's directors wrote in an email to recipients of a grant for training new researchers, 'We are currently unable to process grant awards.' Signage for the Department of Health and Human Services headquarters was seen on April 2 in Washington, D.C. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Pronovost, now the chief quality and clinical transformation officer for the University Hospitals Cleveland, worries about the agency's decimation. His landmark 2006 paper can seem almost dull. It was partially about handwashing reminders and antiseptic usage. It was neither rocket science, nor a blockbuster drug. Nor, for that matter, does it sound like the 'edge science.' But it worked. When Pronovost sees package-delivery companies providing nearly flawless services, he knows that doesn't happen by accident; it happens through a management system. Every time there's a breakdown in what's supposed to happen — a box falling off a conveyor belt, say — there's a notification and an action taken, and if an action isn't taken, then there's an escalation. That was how he helped reduce his hospitals' Medicare expenditures by around 30 percent in 2023, a model that might save estimated $250 billion if applied nationwide. Advertisement Duke University hematologist Charity Oyedeji is pursuing research into measuring and hopefully preventing the functional impairment of adults with sickle cell disease. It started when she noticed just how dramatically her patients' biological ages outstripped their chronological ones. A 50-year-old reported difficulty getting on and off the toilet. A 20-something told her it was hard to reach up and get cups from the cupboard. She wondered whether tailored-to-your-ability exercise programs that have been shown to reduce frailty in older adults might help these people, too. It could improve quality of life and save money at the same time. 'We're trying to intervene early so we can improve their health span,' said Oyedeji, who was speaking in her personal capacity and not on behalf of her employer. 'We want to increase the number of good years that they have.' Oyedeji was in the second year of five — and had spent $300,000 of the $750,000 the NIH had allotted her — when her grant was terminated in June, years before she'd be able to reach any helpful conclusions. When asked about the cancellation of Oyedeji's grant, an HHS spokesperson wrote that the study has 'value,' but that 'it was funded under an inappropriate and ideologically driven — rather than scientifically driven — DEI program under the Biden administration.' Advertisement Researchers don't want to see their work — and participants' time — go to waste. Rice, the Harvard pulmonologist, has been able to scrape together enough money from the university to answer only a third of the questions that the NIH funded her to address. Spending $3.8 million to study how air purifiers could improve a specific type of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease might sound like a lot — and yet the illness itself costs some $24 billion a year in the US, which includes $11.9 billion in prescription drug expenses and $6.3 billion in hospital stays. 'We're throwing a lot of drugs at this,' said Rice, 'but I've found in my prior work that this group is especially susceptible to air pollution, and that led me to propose this trial to see if we could prevent some of the noxious exposures that trigger this severe disease.' To Mueller, 65, the idea made sense. Regular oil changes are ultimately cheaper than needing to get your engine replaced. He didn't want his breathing to worsen if he could help it, but that wasn't why he'd signed up for this trial. He hoped that by giving his time and nasal tissue, the benefits might be multiplied, spread out among others with the same disease, such that the scarring in their lungs could be held at bay. Of course, there might not be any benefit. That was the whole point, the reason for the trial, for the $3.8 million and five years of work. The researchers would only know at the end — if there was an end.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Dangerous nostalgia: Trump wants to turn back time
In the 1978 film 'Superman,' the hero performs many impossible feats, including traveling backward in time by flying around Earth at super speed. Donald Trump, who seems to fancy himself an all-powerful Super President, appears eager to go back in time as well in an effort to return America to 'the good old days' of his youth. Trump was born in 1946, eight years after Superman made his comic book debut. Discrimination based on race, sex and other characteristics was widespread and legal. Most schools taught children a whitewashed version of America's story, glossing over racism and largely ignoring the achievements of people of color. Movies usually portrayed Black people as slaves, servants, cowards, criminals or buffoons. Consequently, 'the good old days' for Trump — born rich, white and male — were 'the bad old days' for many people of color, women, LGBT individuals and those not born to wealth and privilege. Obstacles to advancement facing these Americans — among them my Black parents — were far greater than they are today. Trump grew up at a time when white men dominated the ranks of most professions and elected offices far more than they do now. Only about 34 percent of women were in the workforce in 1950, compared with 57 percent today. Key civil rights laws were not enacted until Trump was in his late teens and 20s. They include the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Act, which together outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex and national origin in federally funded programs, employment, public accommodations, voting and housing. America has made great progress to become a more just and equitable society since Trump was born. But now the president is sparing no effort to roll back that progress and harm millions of Americans. Trump is obsessed with ending programs promoting diversity, equity and inclusion. He has falsely denounced DEI programs as illegal discrimination against white people and men, when in truth they simply open the doors to the American dream a little wider to take advantage of the talents of all Americans. Trump's Department of Education is investigating more than 50 universities for their DEI programs and has cut billions of dollars in federal funding to higher education, prompting schools to end DEI efforts in hopes of restoring aid. Trump has halted DEI programs in the federal government and demanded a halt to DEI in the private sector. The Republican majority on the Federal Communications Commission required that Paramount (parent company of CBS) and the movie studio Skydance agree to not operate DEI programs as a condition for approving the companies' $8 billion merger. The president seems to believe that white Americans — particularly white men — are hired for jobs based on merit, while many people of color and women are less qualified and get into college and jobs primarily because of DEI. He has forced highly qualified federal officials and members of the military who are not white men out of their jobs. Trump fired the chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. CQ Brown, a Black man, after Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth vowed to end DEI in the military and claimed Brown placed a higher priority on DEI than on the effectiveness of the armed forces. The first women to head the Coast Guard and the Navy were both forced out of their jobs, as were women who served as the senior military assistant to Hegseth and the head of the Defense Health Agency. Trump successfully pushed Kim Sajet, the director of the National Portrait Gallery, to resign after denouncing her as 'a strong supporter of DEI' and fired Carla Hayden, the first woman and first Black person to head the Library of Congress. The president and the Republican-controlled Congress have turned back the clock on American progress in many other ways. The White House launched a program designed to deport millions of unauthorized immigrants, reminiscent of Operation Wetback, which deported an estimated 1 million people to Mexico in 1954, including some who were in the U.S. legally. The administration is seeking to increase U.S. oil, natural gas and coal production, along with nuclear power generation, by reducing environmental protection regulations imposed starting in the 1970s. Trump and Congress have also cut federal support for renewable energy programs enacted under the Biden administration. Trump has called global warming a Chinese hoax designed 'to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.' The White House and Congress eliminated all $1.1 billion in previously approved funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which was created under a law enacted in 1967 to help fund PBS, NPR and their member stations. The Corporation soon announced that it would be shuttering. Nostalgia is a powerful emotion. It is understandable that Trump has fond memories of growing up rich in a world of white male privilege before most Americans alive today were born. But nostalgia should not drive public policy. Our country has achieved greatness because — until now — our leaders have been focused on the future, rather than fixated on recreating the days of their youth. Christopher Reeve's portrayal of Superman traveling back in time was great entertainment. But it was fantasy. We need a president who accepts reality and works to build an inclusive and equitable future for everyone in our diverse population.
