Janine Jackson interviewed Defend Public Health’s Elizabeth Jacobs about Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and public health for the September 5, 2025, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.
Janine Jackson: “I have a Kennedy,” Donald Trump allegedly bragged to donors, about putting in Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to head Health and Human Services. Creepy as that statement sounds, you can almost imagine some reporters saying the same.
RFK Jr. is nothing if not “colorful,” what with the brain worm and the bear in the car. But what if news media centered their reporting on the millions of lives affected by the weird man with the famous last name? Would we still be joking about his belief that he can diagnose children walking past him in airports? Or would we be interrogating the systems that elevated such a delusional person, and determining how to mitigate the impacts of his work?
What if media took their eyes off the bouncing ball, and focused on how to safeguard hard-won medical advances, and fight assaults on the idea of health as a boutique purchase, rather than the very definition of a shared concern?
The group Defend Public Health has come together in that effort; our guest is a founding member. Elizabeth Jacobs is an epidemiologist and professor emerita at the University of Arizona. She joins us now by phone from Tucson. Welcome to CounterSpin, Elizabeth Jacobs.
Elizabeth Jacobs: Thank you so much for having me today, Janine.
JJ: I will start by saying that, looking for someone to talk about RFK Jr., I had no interest in talking with someone who only just now decided that he shouldn’t be allowed to touch public health with a pole. Kennedy was not a pig in a poke. There was plenty of record. So while we can be surprised every day by the brazenness of this administration and its believers, there was never a reason to believe that Kennedy as HHS secretary would be, to put the most generous face on it, helpfully critical of pharmaceutical companies, or corporate medicine, in service of regular people.
But there were reasons that some people thought Kennedy was a wagon to hitch to. So let me ask you first, what was the appeal? What void did people think they were filling, do you think?
EJ: I think he talks a really good game, and he was saying things that a lot of people have wanted to hear. Like he wants to look into things like pesticides or environmental toxicants—which, by the way, is a very broad category that he is usually fairly vague on—and I think a lot of people wanted to hear that.
But the issue is that scientists have been studying these things for a long time. And the thought that Mr. Kennedy was going to be the one who is going to address these issues is not one that I ever personally fell for. With that said, I completely understand why he appealed, at least on paper, to many other people. He simply said the right words.
JJ: And we’re in kind of new waters now. Susan Monarez, the head of the CDC, was fired, and then four other top leaders quit. Heads of federal agencies walking out together on principle is not an everyday occurrence. So what do we know about why those CDC officials felt they couldn’t possibly do what they were now being tasked to do? It’s about vaccines, right?
EJ: Right. And we are all faced with a choice: Do we want to believe what Mr. Kennedy says about why they left, or do we want to believe what the scientists themselves are saying?
And I choose the scientists. These are people who are career federal workers, who do this job because they’re dedicated to the public health of the United States of America. Working at the CDC isn’t a glamorous job. It doesn’t come with a huge paycheck compared to, say, if you worked in industry. So I tend to trust these individuals more than I trust Mr. Kennedy.
Their departure, the number of people who have been leaving the CDC, is unprecedented. And, frankly, it really provides a very strong hint as to the existential crisis that is happening right now with Mr. Kennedy as the head of Health and Human Services.
And a great example of that is the fact that he has just installed a person with no scientific training or background at all as the temporary head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It is simply an outrageous, dangerous and unprecedented situation in which we find ourselves.
JJ: And let me just ask you to expound a little bit on the effects. What can we see coming down the road with RFK Jr. and his appointees leading public health policy? I hate to ask you to say it, but what could we be looking at?
EJ: I’ll start with the less obvious one, and then talk about vaccines. So the less obvious concern that I have, for example, is that Mr. Kennedy has said that he wants to fire all the members of the United States Preventive Services Task Force. And that group is responsible for providing recommendations for things like which cancer screenings we should get, and when we should start getting them. And their recommendations are what causes health insurance companies to be required to pay for those screenings. So if he disbands a committee like that, there is a likelihood that our health insurance companies will no longer cover things like cancer screenings.
The very obvious danger that we are in, and that several senators brought up today in his hearing with the Senate Finance Committee, is that vaccines are being undermined daily by Mr. Kennedy. And he protests this, and claims that he’s not an anti-vaxxer, yet he takes actions like replacing every member of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices with people who are anti-vaccine, or hold other very dangerous, pseudo-scientific opinions on this topic. And so it’s going to be a very serious issue with regard to the vaccination coverage in this country. And it’s truly almost impossible for me to believe that this is happening in the United States.
JJ: It feels like a Dr. Seuss world we’re living in, in which the White House statement said that CDC head Susan Monarez was “not aligned with the president’s agenda of making America healthy again.” This is weird. This is just weird.
EJ: Yes. And Dr. Monarez, just one month ago, was praised as a very knowledgeable, ethical leader at CDC, which I agree with. So her dismissal is, again, a funhouse mirror.
If you listen to Mr. Kennedy, he claimed today in the hearing that Dr. Monarez was asked if she was a trustworthy person, and she responded “no.” I find that absolutely impossible to believe. I do not believe that’s what happened. I believe what she says, which is that she was fired because she would not agree with orders, so to speak, from Mr. Kennedy to approve things that were coming out that she did not see the data for, that were going to be released by a group of people who themselves are not trustworthy.
JJ: Public health and public information, as you’re indicating, are very much connected. The man, for example, who shot bullets at the CDC’s windows, that killed a police officer, was, we were told, motivated by beliefs he got from somewhere about Covid vaccines. So it matters very much what ideas we allow into the ether, and that’s where media comes in.
Elizabeth Jacobs: “It is my opinion that misinformation—not just scientific, but all kinds—is the greatest existential threat to the United States right now.”
EJ: That’s right. And it’s both legacy or traditional media and social media. It is my opinion that misinformation—not just scientific, but all kinds—is the greatest existential threat to the United States right now. And we are seeing this play out, and I’ll use social media as the first example.
Social media companies make money through engagement, and therefore they have no motivation whatsoever to stem the tide of misinformation on their platforms. We know, for example, that false information tends to spread on social media orders of magnitude faster than factual information does. And that’s dangerous, because it promotes controversy and engagement, which makes social media companies money.
Now, with the legacy media, my biggest concern is false equivalence. So, for example, when stories are run about vaccines, they may have a doctor on who says vaccines are good; they’re safe and effective. But then they’ll also interview somebody who says, “Oh no, vaccines are no good.” And the problem with that is it creates a false image that those two viewpoints are equivalent, when, in reality, if you wanted to show the equivalence of these two opinions, you would have 100,000 scientists or healthcare professionals who are talking about the benefit and safety of vaccines, versus one person who says that they are dangerous or harmful in some way. And so this false equivalence adds to this misinformation and distrust of science.
JJ: I appreciate that, and Defend Public Health’s Bruce Mirken wrote a great piece back in June, which I saw on 48 Hills, about the “sane-washing,” as we call it, of RFK Jr. And it was great because it talked about precisely what you’re saying: Reporters should note that he says things that are wackadoodle. But then also, they do this thing where they say, “Well, he’s a skeptic on vaccines.” And that ticks a box for a lot of folks, as though RFK Jr had principled concerns. He’s a “skeptic,” and aren’t we all skeptics?
I just want to ask you about the role of journalism here. You’ve started to indicate it, but what could they do less or more of, do you think?
EJ: So I really do think it’s critical to present factual information, and call things what they are. Mr. Kennedy is not a skeptic. He is an anti-vaccination enthusiast. He spreads propaganda. He actually actively spreads disinformation to the people of the United States of America. If he were skeptical, he would actually consider the just massive amount of scientific data to which he has access, which has shown time and time again that vaccines are safe and effective.
So the words that we choose are really important, and I just think there are media outlets who are doing better and better at this. But I just want to repeat that this is an existential crisis for the United States, and we have got to be clear about the danger that Mr. Kennedy poses. This isn’t a minor scientific disagreement. This is the complete undermining of the entire scientific infrastructure of the United States, and our vaccine program.
JJ: There are efforts, finally, including your own, to start with—not end with—getting RFK Jr. out of there. But there’s much more that we need to do.
EJ: Absolutely. And, again, I’m certainly far from alone. People who believe that Mr. Kennedy needs to be removed from office or resign, there are tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands now, who agree with this. And I guess one bright spot from the hearing today is that there are now three Republican senators who spoke on the record about their concerns about Mr. Kennedy’s actions.
So I really hope that this keeps up. I hope that physicians and other healthcare practitioners, nurses, will come forward and really talk to their elected officials about their concerns. Because, again, this is not a trivial worry.
JJ: And let me just ask you, finally, if there’s reporters listening, is there anything that you would ask them to stop doing, or start doing, in terms of journalism? And not just RFK Jr., but public health in general—are there questions you would like them to start asking, or stop asking? What are your thoughts on media?
EJ: I’m not a journalist, and I have a lot of respect for how difficult this job is. I would just say to avoid any sort of desire to look for false equivalence, or present “the other side of the story,” when there are situations where there is no other side of the story. So to make sure that you’re talking with experts in regard to the field that you have under discussion, and, honestly, I would just really prefer to see people who are pseudoscientific quacks get a lot less ink and a lot less airtime, because they do not reflect the beliefs and the understanding of science among the majority of scientists and healthcare practitioners in this country.
JJ: We’ve been speaking with Elizabeth Jacobs. You can find her work, and that of others, at Defend Public Health, right where you would expect to find it, DefendPublicHealth.org. Elizabeth Jacobs, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin. Thank you so much.
EJ: Thanks for having me, Janine.
What a terrible piece. Perhaps the worst submission from Janine Jackson ever. How far FAIR has fallen.
I love Janine Jackson & almost all of FAIR’s articles.
Have no love or faith in RFK, Jr. (esp. after he bent the knee to Rump)
And I believe vaccines have generally been Fantastic over the past 100+ years.
Am interested in valid info and analyses, but when it comes to *Trump’s* WarpSpeed mRNA vaccines, I am deeply troubled by the evidence from many directions.
Why trust Trump & his admin when it comes to Anything ‘Science’ ??
We know the Rump is utterly transactional and lacks any moral or ethical compass. He’s a Sociopath, not a Scientist.
His (in)famous WarpSpeed vax program bypassed nearly every Scientifically-established Safety protocol..safety protocols wisely put in place over many decades. And yet it seems that many on the Left (who despise Rump) essentially want to give a Nobel Prize to Rump for *his* WarpSpeed vax program — in spite of all the early ultra-confident claims (“You will Not get sick; You will Not transmit–IF you get (Trump’s) vax”) being demonstrably false. Every single person I know who got fully Trump-vax’d ended up getting sick with Covid..and not just once, but multiple times. And, they transmitted it to others every time.
But we tend to forget how narratives are slowly shifted..and the early versions are memory-holed organically as they are steadily replaced by the shiny New narratives. In this case, you can easily find vids demonstrating the early narrative relentlessly exclaiming, “You will Not get sick; you will Not transmit!” & “If you don’t accept this (Trump’s) vax, then you are a Bad, Anti-social person!!”
Meanwhile, here’s a simple fact that few are aware of–or at least of the crucial implications:
More Americans died in the 2nd year of Covid than during the 1st year.
Let that sink in.
Did you hear that fact even once via Corporate Media..much less over & over? (nope)
Why not? Oh, it didn’t serve the Big-Pharma Corporate agenda?
If you did happen to hear it, it was to continue the fear-mongering–Not to connect any dots.
In fact, that fact obliterates any notion of Trump’s mRNA vaccines being helpful (efficacy or transmission).
In the 1st year of Covid…Zero were Trump-vax’d.
In the 2nd year of Covid…Most were Trump-vax’d–nearly 100% among those most at risk (elderly, immune-compromised, etc).
And yet..instead of a HUGE Reduction in Covid deaths (say, 90~95% reduction), there were actually More deaths After Trump’s vax was pushed on most Americans.
Other significant reasons that Covid-based deaths *should* have been Greatly reduced in the 2nd year:
1 – Knowledge gained re what to do–or Not do–to treat Covid after ~12 months of hard-won experience & massive worldwide research, etc
2 – many if not most of the most vulnerable (to dying) from Covid had already died, so those remaining the following year would be a more robust population
3 – as a novel pathogen mutates, it nearly always becomes more transmissible but Less lethal
4 – Natural immunity from the many Tens of Millions who had gotten Covid in that 1st year
&
5 – The Miraculous Trump-coddled mRNA-based Vaccines! -which *alone* Should have dropped the deaths by at least 80~90%
Instead, there were More Covid deaths in the 2nd year.
Let that really sink in.
I’ve discussed this with scores of highly intelligent people the past couple yrs and no counter-arguments other than minor ones that might account for a few percentage points difference, but nothing to explain the gaping chasm in what we should have expected (~95% reduction) vs what actually occurred (slight increase).
Meanwhile, do we trust Big Tobacco when it comes to cigarette safety?
Do we trust Big Oil, Big Gas & Big Coal when it comes to safety and the environment?
Do we trust Big Insurance when it comes to our health?
Do we trust Big Chemical Corps such as Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, etc? (how many hundreds of times have supposedly ‘wonderful’ chemicals turned out to be toxins?)
Do we trust Big Military contractors? (the sweet MIC, as Pres. Eisenhower called it/them)
Do we trust Private Security contractors such as Blackwater? (or whatever they’re called after multiple name changes)
Do wet trust M$, Google, Apple, FB, Twitter/X, Oracle, Palintir, etc with our personal info, etc?
So why do we trust Big Pharma when there’s literally $Tens of Billions at stake..when they could either make–or lose–$Tens of Billions..?
And where does our ‘Scientific’ confidence originate when it comes to Trump’s mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer & Moderna?
If comes from….them–Pfizer & Moderna–They do the ‘studies’ that the Corp-Captured FDA, CDC, etc rely upon for safety & efficacy.
But I guess since Big Pharma (vax-makers) have been protected from liability for vaccine harm, we can trust them.
As we citizens foot the bill time after time for payouts to our fellow vax-injured citizens.
So Big Pharma rakes in Massive Profits while off-loading losses onto us.
Is that more evidence of trustworthiness?
Is it possible that Trump & Co (along with Big Pharma Ad-sponsored Corporate Media) made us so terrified, that we accepted whatever they were selling?
If you are severely dehydrated & terrified of dying, and some snake-oil guy offers you a glass of salt-water–telling you it’s an elixir (for a good portion of your coppers), do you trust him?
Oh, but he’s got several folks lined up all claiming..swearing even, “It helped save me from Dehydration!”
You can believe that most vaccines are perfectly great, while being skeptical re Trump’s snake-oil elixir.
Especially once you see–firsthand–it’s not worked as advertised. Vax’d people got sick (repeatedly) & they spread it to others..repeatedly.
The 2 times I’ve gotten Covid…I got it from fully vax’d people–who were very sick themselves, btw.
Maybe we’ve been duped by Big Tobacco…oh, I mean, Big Oil..I mean..Big Chem..
Science is only as good as its weakest link…which tends to be human & profit motive links.
You are lying Tom, and a lie that omits relevant facts is still a lie. Your kind of lie, which tries to have it both ways, on the one hand pretending to be skeptical while in the other hand coming to firm conclusions, is the worse kind of misinfo being spread online. Part of skepticism and being a skeptic is remaining open minded to correction, being able to accept new info that debunks the lies that the skeptic might still believe.
You said: a lot of silly shit but this quote below was just stupid and demonstrably false “…but when it comes to *Trump’s* WarpSpeed mRNA vaccines, I am deeply troubled by the evidence from many directions.” Except you provided no evidence Tom.)
Then you said: “Why trust Trump & his admin when it comes to Anything ‘Science’ ??” This is a misleading opinion-based empty assertion. You are ignoring that much of the civil society scientists at that time were there prior to Trump. You are an example of what you whine about, no evidence, nothing but hot air and bluster, you cite not one peer-reviewed study, not one source to back up your bullshit. Hypocrite.
Here are the facts, followed by where those facts were sourced, Google is still a valid tool that links to real scientific evidence:
“….mRNA vaccines were not invented by the Trump administration, and it’s misleading to pretend they were. While the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed accelerated the production and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines in 2020, the underlying mRNA technology was developed over decades of research conducted by many scientists.”
The source for the above is Google’s “A. I. Overview,” and if you search for “scientific studies that refute the danger of MRNA vaccines,” another “Google A.I.Overview” should pop up that has a link to several studies, experiments, and research that supports the safety and efficacy of MRNA vaccines.
I never stated that Trump “invented” mRNA vaccines.
That said, how many mRNA vaccines were actually on the market Prior to his admin’s WarpSpeed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines?
Answer = ZERO
Research re mRNA (related to potential vaccines, therapeutics, etc) has been been going on since the 1980’s. But how many mRNA-based vaccines or therapeutics ever made it to market?
Answer = ZERO
Best I can tell it’s because they never passed safety tests.
But suddenly we’re supposed to accept (from the Maker’s research..speaking of bias?)
Note: I do not have $Tens of Billions riding on any of this.
In fact, I have no money riding on any of this.
But I do have a bias, and that is for the truth..for accuracy & honesty & common + logical/rational sense.
Meanwhile, you did not address any of my other primary points:
1 – Fact that More died After the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines had been very widely administered.
2 – Fact that almost everyone who got vaccinated still got sick (typically multiple times) and passed it to others.
Note that while you were being aggressively judgemental & insulting, I’ve been polite in both my initial post & now in follow-up.
Want research that at least partially backs up my concerns/skepticism?
How about peer-reviewed published research that’s from Dr. Anthony Fauci (along with 2 others)?
Read his & his cohorts’ perspective & concerns well After the mRNA-based vaccines had been given to 100+ Million Americans.. while he/they claim success, they seem focused more on the Lack of efficacy–which is one of my own key points.
from Jan. 2023
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses
David M. Morens ∙ Jeffery K. Taubenberger taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov ∙ Anthony S. Fauci
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(22)00572-8
“.. (these viruses, incl coronaviruses) have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines. ”
etc…
My response here was removed for some unknown reason, so I’m trying again.
(could the moderator email me to let me know why my 2 comments were removed? -Thank you)
—-
I never stated that Trump “invented” mRNA vaccines.
That said, how many mRNA vaccines were actually on the market Prior to his admin’s WarpSpeed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines?
Answer = ZERO
Research re mRNA (related to potential vaccines, therapeutics, etc) has been been going on since the 1980’s. But how many mRNA-based vaccines or therapeutics ever made it to market?
Answer = ZERO
Best I can tell it’s because they never passed safety tests.
But suddenly we’re supposed to accept (from the vax-Maker’s research..speaking of bias?) Trump’s novel & yet super-accelerated mRNA-based vaccines?
Note: I do not have $Tens of Billions riding on any of this.
In fact, I have no money riding on any of this.
But I do have a bias, and that is for the truth..for accuracy & honesty & common + logical/rational sense.
Meanwhile, you did not address any of my other primary points:
1 – Fact that More died After the SARS-CoV-2 vaccines had been very widely administered.
2 – Fact that almost everyone who got vaccinated still got sick (typically multiple times) and passed it to others.
Note that while you were being aggressively judgemental & insulting, I’ve been polite in both my initial post & now in follow-up.
Want research that at least partially backs up my concerns/skepticism?
How about peer-reviewed published research that’s from Dr. Anthony Fauci (along with 2 others)?
Read his & his cohorts’ perspective & concerns well After the mRNA-based vaccines had been given to 100+ Million Americans.. while he/they claim success, they seem focused more on the Lack of efficacy–which is one of my own key points.
from Jan. 2023
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses
David M. Morens ∙ Jeffery K. Taubenberger taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov ∙ Anthony S. Fauci
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(22)00572-8
“.. (these viruses, incl coronaviruses) have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines. ”
etc…
Guess others here also are dubious of Dr. Fauci, eh?
No responses to my link to Dr. Fauci’s published article in a widely respected science publication, Cell.
Again, for anyone interested:
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses
David M. Morens ∙ Jeffery K. Taubenberger taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov ∙ Anthony S. Fauci
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(22)00572-8
“.. (these viruses, incl coronaviruses) have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines. ”
etc…
Tom, I might be wrong, and I’m not too proud to admit that I don’t have all the answers, and nothing in what I posted above, was meant to pretend so. Maybe instead of people moulding the evidence to fit a particular narrative a person should listen to experts instead? Listening to the experts who have actual experience in the field, actual scientists and technicians who have been conducting studies of MRNA vaccines, rather than only sticking to one’s own feelings, is not unreasonable is it?
Part of reaching consensus requires that everybody stays aware of their own false assumptions, make attempts to examine their own unexamined presuppositions, and to try and realize ones own hidden a-priori beliefs. It isn’t easy to do all of the latter, it is tough to admit it when one is wrong, but it must be done if and when it occurs. Dishonesty is easy. Honesty is the minimum the lowest bar that should be set, if ever society is going to get over this weird slump it is going through with people acting like they have all the answers, when most people don’t know shit.
There is abundant research of the highest quality from all around the world showing beyond all reasonable doubt the safety and effectiveness of mRNA vaccines. Why you would choose to believe anti-vaccination ideologues who rely on unfounded allegations… well, that is for you to think about.
Do you trust Dr. Anthony Fauci, former head of the CDC?
If so, then you may find this interesting..
Peer-reviewed published research that’s from Dr. Anthony Fauci (along with 2 others).
Read his & his cohorts’ perspective & concerns well After the mRNA-based vaccines had been given to 100+ (likely 200+) Million Americans.. while he/they claim success, they seem focused more on the Lack of efficacy–which is one of my own key points up above.
from Jan. 2023
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses
David M. Morens ∙ Jeffery K. Taubenberger taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov ∙ Anthony S. Fauci
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(22)00572-8
“.. (these viruses, incl coronaviruses) have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines. ”
etc…
To Airlane: Are you the commenter who used to go by “Rebecca?” If so, cool. If not cool. I agree with you, and I agree with the gist of the article, and was only trying to add context to my reply to “Tom.”
Cheers,
The Other Knob
RFK Jr.’s brain worm is slated to appear in a cameo for an upcoming episode of Hulu’s TV series “Alien Earth.”
Can you imagine if Obama had appointed some whack job Nepo baby buffoon to head the CDC? Can you imagine if Kamala handed out cabinet jobs based off the names who paid the most on her donor list? This shit RFK Jr. did where he fired all of the actual doctors and scientists on that board and replaced them with industry shills and yesmen, would be unimaginable under a Democratic administration. It’s as if people have totally lost the ability to think in terms of the blatant double standards and false equivalencies between the two parties. It’s true what they say the GOP abuses power the DNC refuses power. The net effect is that we are all powerless to effect any real world change, That’s why I’m hoping there’s an American Spring of sorts where everybody people for and against the Trump regime, finally get so fed up and start to walk off their jobs en masse, some sort of nationwide coordinated flash mob or general strike! It ain’t going to happen though because we’re all on our phones or stuck at home watching TV….lol
Are others here also dubious of Dr. Fauci?
Or, if you trust him, then read his published article in the widely-respected science journal, Cell, from 2023 (well after mRNA vaccines had been implemented).
– – –
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses
David M. Morens
Jeffery K. Taubenberger taubenbergerj@niaid.nih.gov
* Anthony S. Fauci *
https://www.cell.com/cell-host-microbe/fulltext/S1931-3128(22)00572-8
“.. (these viruses, incl coronaviruses) have not to date been effectively controlled by licensed or experimental vaccines. ”
..etc.