Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has proposed a controversial policy that could bar government scientists from publishing in prestigious medical journals, including The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine, and JAMA. Kennedy criticizes these journals as “corrupt” and influenced by pharmaceutical companies, suggesting the creation of in-house publications by his agency as an alternative .
Kennedy’s remarks, made during an appearance on the “Ultimate Human” podcast, reflect a broader skepticism within the Trump administration toward established scientific institutions. He accused several agencies under the Department of Health and Human Services, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), of being “sock puppets” for the pharmaceutical industry .
The proposed policy has drawn sharp criticism from the scientific community. Adam Gaffney, a public health researcher and assistant professor at Harvard Medical School, warned that such a move would delegitimize taxpayer-funded research. He emphasized that banning NIH-funded researchers from publishing in leading medical journals and requiring them to publish only in journals approved by Kennedy would undermine the integrity of scientific research .
Kennedy’s plan includes the establishment of government-run journals that he claims would become the new standard due to NIH funding’s association with scientific legitimacy. He argues that these in-house publications would replace the current “biased” journals, which he believes prioritize corporate profits over scientific integrity .
This initiative aligns with the recently released “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) report, which challenges mainstream medical consensus on issues such as vaccines. Medical experts have criticized the report for stretching the limits of science and offering misleading representations of findings in scientific papers .
The scientific community is concerned that Kennedy’s actions may drive researchers overseas due to reduced support and opportunities in the U.S. NIH funding has already fallen by more than $3 billion since President Donald Trump’s inauguration, and top universities have lost out on government funding for research .
At HHS, Kennedy has spearheaded a purge of about 20,000 federal workers, impacting virtually every arm of the research and regulatory agency, which oversees Medicare and Medicaid. The personnel cuts and funding freezes have prompted U.S. scientists to consider moving abroad as countries such as France, Germany, Spain, and China have begun actively recruiting American researchers .
Kennedy’s controversial policy changes also include discontinuing CDC recommendations for COVID-19 vaccines in certain populations. These actions have raised concerns about scientific censorship and the politicization of health policy .
Critics argue that Kennedy’s approach threatens to isolate U.S. research and further politicize the nation’s scientific institutions. They emphasize that science thrives under transparency and peer review, and undermining scientific integrity does not bode well for maintaining robust public health systems .
The targeted journals have not immediately responded to requests for comment on Kennedy’s remarks. However, the broader scientific community continues to express alarm over the potential implications of restricting publication avenues for government-funded research .
As the debate continues, the future of scientific research dissemination in the U.S. remains uncertain. The potential shift away from established medical journals to government-run publications raises questions about the objectivity, credibility, and global collaboration in scientific endeavors.