this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2025
270 points (98.9% liked)

politics

21781 readers
4009 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In a sweeping interview, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health and human services secretary, outlined a strategy for containing the measles outbreak in West Texas that strayed far from mainstream science, relying heavily on fringe theories about prevention and treatments.

He issued a muffled call for vaccinations in the affected community, but said the choice was a personal one. He suggested that measles vaccine injuries were more common than known, contrary to extensive research.

He asserted that natural immunity to measles, gained through infection, somehow also protected against cancer and heart disease, a claim not supported by research.

He cheered on questionable treatments like cod liver oil, and said that local doctors had achieved “almost miraculous and instantaneous” recoveries with steroids or antibiotics.

MBFC
Archive

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Way more than twice. Samoa is just a case study that is very publicized because the impact is easy to directly measure given it was an island

He is prominent and visible and uses that visibility to purposely misled. He is not just “some guy”. He has chaired foundations with serious money behind them based on these beliefs. He writes pseudoscientific articles (and promotes the work of others that do the same). Articles that have a “sciencey tone” but are fairly easily discredited by anyone with a pulse and a background in biology, statistics, medicine, etc. Lazy and corrupt journalism has platformed him and his foundation for almost a decade now because they can’t be bothered to do even basic fact checking. Salon had to retract an article he wrote because it was so misleading. Rolling stone published the same article but didn’t bother to retract it.

When called out on his paper being full of errors and bullshit he claimed government conspiracy on Joe Rogan. He exhibited similar behavior in his confirmation hearing, pulling a bullshit paper from a fake journal and when people tore it to shreds online, why couldn’t he find research in a reputable journal like nature, etc he went back to that bullshit conspiracy argument. The government wants your children to have autism you see, even though thimerosal isn’t in vaccines anymore (and never caused autism to begin with)

He was one of the loudest voices against Covid vaccines. And his voice was one of the ugliest. He consistently stokes racial tensions with his anti vaccination arguments. He suggested it was racially motivated loudly and publicly. He was one of 12 people responsible for 65% of anti vaccination content on instagram. This isn’t directly measurable like Samoa but given the us Covid death toll he very much caused preventable death, again. And shocker, he’s also anti 5G

On the racism bit he actively targets black americans with anti vaccination propaganda. His “foundation” specifically releases literature and media linking vaccines to the concept of medical racism and Tuskegee. He takes advantage of pain felt by marginalized communities to advance his agenda even though it puts said communities in danger

And for some icing on the cake he denies the link between HIV and AIDS and advocates against retrovirals.

People talk about the worm in his brain and all that nonsense but they don’t talk about the 14 years of drug addiction (and probably much longer). By all accounts Kennedy started doing drugs and acting out in his teens with basically no consequences. His reward for acting like a shithead, doing heroin and cocaine, stealing shit, vandalizing property, etc? Getting to go to harvard because of nepotism and then become a rich lawyer. He claims he got clean after he got caught for possession of heroin in the 80s. He did a single rehab program. I have worked in rehab, it is extremely uncommon that someone with a 15 year addiction quits after one go. Especially someone with a shitload of money.

I would not be surprised if he switched to pharmaceuticals and considered that “quitting” as it “legitimized” his addiction (even though taking 20 adderall a day isn’t how it’s supposed to work) and then eventually cleaned up his act later on. It would explain why he is so vehemently opposed to stimulants for psychiatric treatment: “I couldn’t handle taking one or two a day so obviously no one can, this shit is poison!” type projection. Obviously this is conjecture though.

I have a great deal of sympathy for people who struggle with addiction and I don’t care if you do drugs but at some point my sympathy stops. The Kennedy family created a monster by giving him unfettered access to resources and 0 consequences for shitty behavior. Now he’s still very rich (est net worth of 20-30 million) and he uses that to fuck over countless people. Fuck him

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for that insightful response. Do you think they put him in his current position because of nepotism too? Because I'm suspecting they genuinely picked him for his portfolio. An epidemic would grant the current administration much more power.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Truthfully I think he was someone that was cutting into trumps base of conspiracy nuts. at the same time I wonder if he was someone funded or otherwise heavily encouraged by a state actor hostile to america that needed a useful idiot (or a willing accomplice, depending on his culpability) to help destabilize america further.

Neptotism was always a factor though. His foundation only ever got off the ground because of Kennedy money and connections. He was picked in part because he was in a place to run but he was in a place to run because of a lifetime of nepotism