Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Just the Facts: Vaccine Safety, RFK Jr.’s Claims, and Florida’s Mandate Rollback

Inside the Vaccine Controversy: Facts, Fears, and the Fight Over Mandates

News

A medical professional wearing gloves, putting a band-aid on a patient's shoulder.

RFK Jr. has publicly challenged the safety of vaccines, although the evidence he cites is widely disputed by mainstream scientists, medical institutions, and public health experts.

Getty Images, Jackyenjoyphotography

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is currently the United States Secretary of Health and Human Services and is responsible for shaping national health policy, managing public health programs, and guiding medical research and regulatory frameworks.

He has publicly challenged the safety of vaccines, including required childhood immunizations and COVID-19 vaccines. However, the evidence he cites is widely disputed by mainstream scientists, medical institutions, and public health experts.


What are the facts?

What the Research Says About Safety

  • Hundreds of large-scale studies have examined the safety of vaccines like MMR (measles, mumps, rubella), DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis), polio, and others.
  • These studies consistently show that routine childhood vaccines are safe, with no link to autism, diabetes, fertility issues, or developmental delays.
  • The American Academy of Pediatrics, CDC, and World Health Organization all affirm that the risk of serious adverse effects is extremely low.

What Are the Known Side Effects

Most vaccine side effects are short-lived and mild:

  • Fever
  • Soreness at the injection site
  • Fatigue or fussiness

However, There Are Rare but Documented Risks, Which Include:

  • Febrile seizures (linked to fever, not brain damage)
  • Severe allergic reactions (anaphylaxis occurs in about one in a million doses)
  • Blood clotting issues (extremely rare and typically treatable)

These risks are tracked through systems like VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) and Vaccine Safety Datalink, which monitor and investigate any patterns.

What Are the Issues Related to Vaccination Misinformation

  • The MMR-autism myth has been thoroughly debunked. Over 27 studies have shown no causal link.
  • Experts caution that repeating misinformation—even to refute it—can reinforce false associations. That’s why clarity and nuance are key in public discourse.

Why Do Vaccine Mandates Exist

Required vaccines are designed to:

  • Protect individual children from serious illness
  • Create herd immunity to prevent outbreaks
  • Safeguard vulnerable populations (e.g., infants, immunocompromised individuals)

When mandates are weakened, as seen in recent policy shifts in Florida, experts warn of increased risk for outbreaks of preventable diseases like measles and polio.

What Are RFK Jr.'s Key Claims?

  1. Vaccines cause harm, including death, especially among young people. He has endorsed statements like:
  2. Doctors recommend vaccines for financial gain. He claimed pediatricians are “pressured to follow the money, not the science,” suggesting financial incentives drive vaccine recommendations.
  3. Aluminum in vaccines causes autism and other chronic conditions. He misrepresented a large Danish study, claiming its supplementary data showed “calamitous evidence of harm,” despite the study concluding no link between aluminum-containing vaccines and autism.
  4. Children receive an excessive number of shots. He has claimed that children get up to 92 mandatory shots, which is factually incorrect. Most states require around 30–32 shots across 10–12 diseases.

What Are the Scientific Rebuttals to RFK’s Claims

  • Medical experts and fact-checkers have repeatedly shown that RFK Jr. cherry-picks data, misinterprets studies, and relies on anecdotal or non-peer-reviewed sources.
  • The CDC, FDA, WHO, and American Academy of Pediatrics maintain that vaccines are rigorously tested and monitored, with benefits far outweighing risks.
  • VAERS, a system RFK Jr. often cites, collects unverified reports and explicitly warns that entries do not imply causation.

Are There National Mandates for Child Vaccines or Do Just States Mandate Vaccinations?

  • Under the Tenth Amendment, states hold the “police power” to protect public health and safety. This was affirmed in the landmark 1905 Supreme Court case Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which upheld a state’s authority to mandate smallpox vaccination during an outbreak.
  • The federal government does not impose universal vaccine mandates for children. Its role is more about guidance and funding—for example, through the CDC’s recommended immunization schedule and programs like Vaccines for Children (VFC).

School Entry Requirements

  • Every U.S. state requires certain vaccines for children to attend public (and often private) schools.
  • These typically include:
    • DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis)
    • MMR (measles, mumps, rubella)
    • Polio
    • Varicella (chickenpox)
    • Hepatitis B
  • States also define exemptions, which vary widely:
    • Medical exemptions (allowed in all states)
    • Religious exemptions (allowed in most)
    • Philosophical exemptions (allowed in some)

Does the Federal Government Have Any Influence on Vaccination Mandates?

While the federal government doesn’t mandate vaccines for schoolchildren, it can:

  • Require vaccines for immigrants, military personnel, and federal employees
  • Tie funding conditions to vaccine compliance in healthcare settings (e.g., Medicare/Medicaid facilities)

Is Florida Considering Ending the Mandates for Vaccines?

Florida is actively working to end all childhood vaccine mandates, which would make it the first state in the U.S. to do so. Governor Ron DeSantis and Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo announced plans to phase out vaccine requirements for schoolchildren, including those for:

  • Measles
  • Polio
  • Chickenpox
  • Hepatitis B
  • DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis)

Ladapo described current mandates as “immoral” and likened them to “slavery,” arguing they infringe on parental rights and bodily autonomy.

What Is the Legal Path Forward in Florida?

  • The Florida Department of Health can repeal mandates it enacted through its own rulemaking.
  • However, some vaccine requirements are written into state law, so legislative action will be needed to eliminate them entirely.
  • A new “Make America Healthy Again” commission has been formed to guide this effort, chaired by Lt. Gov. Jay Collins and First Lady Casey DeSantis.

Has There Been Pushback From Experts to the Florida Proposal?

  • Pediatricians and public health officials warn that this could lead to outbreaks of preventable diseases, especially in schools.
  • Florida already has a higher-than-average exemption rate, with most being nonmedical.
  • Critics say the move prioritizes ideology over science, while supporters frame it as a win for medical freedom.
David Nevins is publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.

Read More

Pro-Trump protestors
Trump supporters who attempted to overturn the 2020 election results are now seeking influential election oversight roles in battleground states.
Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images

Loving Someone Who Thinks the Election Was Stolen

He’s the kind of man you’d want as a neighbor in a storm.

Big guy. Strong hands. The person you’d call if your car slid into a ditch. He lives rural, works hard, supports a wife and young son, and helps care for his aging mom. Life has not been easy, but he shows up anyway.

Keep ReadingShow less
Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

U.S. President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House on December 15, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Project 2025 Drives Trump’s State Dept Overhaul

In May 2025, I wrote about the Trump administration’s early State Department reforms aligned with Project 2025, including calls for budget cuts, mission closures, and policy realignments. At the time, the most controversial move was an executive order targeting the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), shutting it down and freezing all federal foreign aid. This decision reflected Project 2025’s recommendation to scale back and "deradicalize" USAID by eliminating programs deemed overly politicized or inconsistent with conservative values. The report specifically criticized USAID for funding progressive initiatives, such as policies addressing systemic racism and central economic planning, arguing that U.S. foreign aid had become a "massive and open-ended global entitlement program" benefiting left-leaning organizations. The process connecting the report’s ideological critiques to this executive action involved a strategic alignment between key administration officials and Project 2025 architects, who lobbied for immediate policy adjustments. This coalition effectively linked the critique to policy by framing it as a necessary step toward realigning foreign aid with national interests and conservative principles.

Back then, I predicted even more sweeping changes to the State Department. Since May, several major developments have indeed reshaped the department:

Keep ReadingShow less
SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.
apples and bananas in brown cardboard box
Photo by Maria Lin Kim on Unsplash

SNAP Isn’t a Negotiating Tool. It’s a Lifeline.

Millions of families just survived the longest shutdown in U.S. history. Now they’re bracing again as politicians turn food assistance into a bargaining chip.

Food assistance should not be subject to politics, yet the Trump administration is now requiring over 20 Democratic-led states to share sensitive SNAP recipient data—including Social Security and immigration details—or risk losing funding. Officials call it "program integrity," but the effect is clear: millions of low-income families may once again have their access to food threatened by political disputes.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections
us a flag on white concrete building

Democrats’ Redistricting Gains Face New Court Battles Ahead of 2026 Elections

Earlier this year, I reported on Democrats’ redistricting wins in 2025, highlighting gains in states like California and North Carolina. As of December 18, the landscape has shifted again, with new maps finalized, ongoing court battles, and looming implications for the 2026 midterms.

Here are some key developments since mid‑2025:

  • California: Voters approved Proposition 50 in November, allowing legislature‑drawn maps that eliminated three safe Republican seats and made two more competitive. Democrats in vulnerable districts were redrawn into friendlier territory.
  • Virginia: On December 15, Democrats in the House of Delegates pushed a constitutional amendment on redistricting during a special session. Republicans denounced the move as unconstitutional, setting up a legal and political fight ahead of the 2026 elections.
  • Other states in play:
    • Ohio, Texas, Utah, Missouri, North Carolina: New maps are already in effect, reshaping battlegrounds.
    • Florida and Maryland: Legislatures have begun steps toward redistricting, though maps are not yet finalized.
    • New York: Court challenges may force changes to existing maps before 2026.
    • National picture: According to VoteHub’s tracker, the current district breakdown stands at 189 Democratic‑leaning, 205 Republican‑leaning, and 41 highly competitive seats.

Implications for 2026

  • Democrats’ wins in California and North Carolina strengthen their position, but legal challenges in Virginia and New York could blunt momentum.
  • Republicans remain favored in Texas and Ohio, where maps were redrawn to secure GOP advantages.
  • The unusually high number of mid‑decade redistricting efforts — not seen at this scale since the 1800s — underscores how both parties are aggressively shaping the battlefield for 2026.
So, here's the BIG PICTURE: The December snapshot shows Democrats still benefiting from redistricting in key states, but the fight is far from settled. With courts weighing in and legislatures maneuvering, the balance of power heading into the 2026 House elections remains fluid. What began as clear Democratic wins earlier in 2025 has evolved into a multi‑front contest over maps, legality, and political control.

Hugo Balta is the executive editor of the Fulcrum and the publisher of the Latino News Network