Why Dr. Craig Spencer Got It Right

His article, 'Public Health Needs MAHA', describes an opportunity. We see it too. His detractors are missing its message.

So we’re reading through many of the responses to our friend Craig’s piece called Public Health Needs MAHA.

Our main takeaway is many folks in public health vehemently dislike MAHA because to them, the entire movement IS the actions of Donald Trump and Robert F Kennedy Jr, whom they see as being 1) single-handedly responsible for the greatest destruction of a federal scientific infrastructure that since WW2 has produced life-transforming innovations which are the envy of the world 2) anti-vaccine and 3) undermining scientific expertise.

• Donald Trump absolutely has done #1. It is without a doubt one of the biggest stains of his presidency.

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in our estimation, is #2, though frankly what’s noteworthy at this moment is that despite this, the nation’s vaccine infrastructure HASN’T been dismantled and Americans remain pro-vaccine. We also have fighters inside public health to thank for that.

• Kennedy has absolutely undermined scientific expertise to the point where good science now needs to be defended because so many people just automatically assume scientists are in the pocket of big Pharma. We have advised friends inside MAHA that this is not a good move. We have said this to Dr Oz when we interviewed him recently.

But what is also clear is that public health all too frequently equates the millions of people who support some part of this movement with the actions of the administration.

What they don’t see is that all these moms and dads and young people support Robert F. Kennedy Jr because he has given voice to a desire to have someone fight for their health, which they don’t trust is being cared for by a financially-incentivized medical system. They are frustrated by their experiences inside that system. And for whatever reason, the persistent, hard work and messaging of public health and that of specific administrations with initiatives such as the Let’s Move campaign just never connected with them. We’re not denying that local campaigns and projects have had their amazing impacts – that is real. But national movements can also be real and result in mindset change on a deeper level. Because they rely not just on policy, but on organizing and on culture. Just ask the people who fought for Tobacco Free Kids or Mothers Against Drunk Driving. Policy + politics + culture = change.

Many we speak with inside MAHA grassroots are frankly ambivalent about the phrase MAHA. They wish they weren’t called that anymore. They didn’t choose it. They chose to fight for health. And a label was slapped on them to promote a convenient political alliance. These days, many tell us they are quite disappointed with the lack of policy wins with this administration and yes, even with their leader Kennedy.

We have heard public health voices say that, like Kennedy, these supporters abandoned the Democrats.

Let’s be clear. The Democrats abandoned them. Two former Democratic presidential candidates have come on our podcast saying as much (Sen. Cory Booker and former congressman Tim Ryan). The party decided that this movement of Americans had to be stopped because of the anti-vaccine beliefs of some of its followers. That meant the party lost potential allies in the fight for the environment, healthier food, nutrition, access to preventive care, and against the systemic causes of chronic disease.

And let’s talk about vaccine hesitancy. Despite overwhelming support for vaccines, one out of six young parents in this country skips or delays vaccines for their kids. Twenty percent either don’t have too much or any confidence at all in the safety of the childhood vaccine schedule.

What are you going to do, kick them out of your clinics? Remove them from your conferences? Label them all anti-vaxxers and wait for them to leave the public sphere? Pretend they don’t exist? Consider for a moment the possibility that shunning them might only reinforce the message they hear about you: that public health is elitist, institutionalist, and doesn’t have your back.

Lashing out at a movement of people who have begun to break with this administration, and enter a search for a new political and ideological home, one that prioritizes many of the things you prioritize, seems to us like a mistake. Definitionally, you need to demonstrate that you see a difference between MAHA leadership and supporters of an insurgent health movement that yes, maybe you don’t totally see eye to eye with, but you recognize that they have tapped into something that we need to finally admit, the rest of us have not.

And rather than pile on a public health veteran who is calling for others in his field to find common ground with MAHA where it is possible, while rejecting the dangerous, unscientific elements, perhaps it is time to do a little mindset change ourselves. We cannot afford to keep waiting for the exact right cast of characters to come along in order to listen to the country as it is and fight for them.

41% of the US population say they identify with the MAHA movement’s platform. You can and should fight Trump’s and Kennedy’s destructive policies, while still bringing these supporters into a dialogue. They are not a monolith. And neither are you. It’s the smart thing to do.