Can RFK Jr.. fix our dysfunctional public health agencies?
reason.com
The CDC, the FDA, and the NIH have long needed drastic reform. But is putting Robert Kennedy Jr. in charge of HHS the right way to fix them?
    • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
      118·
      9 days ago

      I don’t know that he’ll fix it, but he’s def gonna make some changes. Now if those are good or bad changes, I have no clue. But it’s gonna be interesting.

      • Clasm@ttrpg.network
        9·
        9 days ago

        “Interesting” policies in health and wellness in this context only means that it’s going to get a lot of people killed.

        • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
          114·
          9 days ago

          He hasn’t implemented anything yet, so I’ll wait to see what happens before I judge the policies since we have no idea what will happen.

          • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
            8·
            9 days ago

            Hold a brick above your foot and let go.

            You have no idea what will happen! It could be anything! It could even be a boat!

            • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
              16·
              8 days ago

              But I know what happens when I hold a brick when I let it go. We don’t know what will happen when RFK takes over some public health agencies.

              • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                5·
                8 days ago

                You’ve dropped a brick on your foot, specifically? That exact sequence of events? Nothing else could prepare you to say what would happen. Was it a brown brick? Have you tried red? What about cinderblocks?

                We know goddamn well what putting a denialist crank in charge of public health would do to public health.

                This is the party trying to ban certain medicines. It’s gonna be awful for everyone. Anything else would be as surprising as if you let go, and the brick fell up.

  • Swordgeek@lemmy.ca
    11·
    9 days ago

    Not a fucking chance. Zero. That question shouldn’t even be asked, because it implies the existence of doubt.

  • merc@sh.itjust.works
    5·
    9 days ago

    But is putting Robert Kennedy Jr. in charge of HHS the right way to fix them?

    Hahahahaha, no.

    I’m not sure the premise is even sound, that the CDC, FDA and NIH have “long needed drastic reform”. But, if that were true, you’d want an expert in leadership and management to address the problem, not a fucking nutjob. To reform those agencies, you’d need someone who the bureaucracies would trust has the same goals they do. Sure, there would always be people who would not want any reform, but you would also have allies who agree something needs to change, and who would support the necessary changes. Nobody at those agencies is going to listen to a fucking nutjob. Instead, they’d do everything possible to sabotage everything he was trying.

    “Back in 2017, RFK Jr. talked with then-President Trump about setting up a vaccine safety review commission”

    The fucking nutjob is an antivaxxer. That would be like putting a flat-earther in charge of NASA.

    The whole premise is stupid. An opinion piece in a rabidly libertarian rag declares that these agencies need reform, citing other opinion pieces articles from this same rabidly libertarian rag.

    These agencies may need some tweaks, but Reason magazine isn’t a reputable source for what changes are needed, and RFK junior is definitely not the person who should be in charge of anything. If he tries, at best he’ll merely fail. At worst he’ll do serious damage to these important agencies that will take years to undo.

    • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
      15·
      8 days ago

      but Reason magazine isn’t a reputable source

      You make a lot of great points, but I disagree about Reason not being a reputable source. I like them.

        • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
          14·
          8 days ago

          Well, you are totally welcome to think that. I respect your right to feel that way. But I’ll keep posting stuff from Reason, because I like them. Thanks!

          • merc@sh.itjust.works
            3·
            7 days ago

            Liking them isn’t enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They’re not. They’re incredibly biased and their bias is towards a world view that’s absurd. Just because your filter bubble feels good doesn’t mean it’s not harmful to you.

            • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
              15·
              7 days ago

              Liking them isn’t enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They’re not.

              I happen to think they are pretty reliable, and def not any less reliable than most news orgs. All news orgs are biased.

              I don’t think anyone on Lemmy can really talk about “filter bubble.” I mean, Lemmy is an even bigger filter bubble than reddit! lol

              But hey, I like them. I totally get lots of others don’t. I’m cool with you thinking that. All good, friend!

            • Universal Monk@sh.itjust.worksOPMEnglish
              13·
              7 days ago

              Then feel free to start your own community and post The Onion articles.

              I created this community. And I allow posting from the Daily Mail.

              Be the change you wanna see, comrade.

  • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
    4·
    9 days ago

    Yes, by convincing a bunch of conservatives to kill themselves with listeria thus driving the population of America quickly to the left