Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The Saturated Fat Fallacy: RFK Jr.’s Dietary Crusade Endangers Public Health

Public health leaders condemn Kennedy’s dietary shift as reckless and unsupported by evidence.

Opinion

​Former Republican presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Former Republican presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. listens during a campaign rally for Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump at Desert Diamond Arena on August 23, 2024 in Glendale, Arizona.

Getty Images, Rebecca Noble

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s recent embrace of saturated fats as part of a national health strategy is consistent with much of Kennedy’s health policy, which is often short of clinical proven data and offers opinions to Americans that are potentially outright dangerous.

By promoting butter, red meat, and full-fat dairy without clear intake guidelines or scientific consensus, Kennedy is not just challenging dietary orthodoxy. He’s undermining the very institutions tasked with safeguarding public health.


Kennedy has publicly praised saturated fats, claiming they’ve been “unfairly demonized” and suggesting Americans need more of them—not less. He suggests that Americans should follow a carnivore-style diet and has hinted that new federal guidelines under his leadership will reflect this shift.

Yet he has failed to specify a safe upper limit for saturated fat intake, ignoring decades of research linking it to elevated LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular disease.

Kennedy’s statements contradict the American Heart Association's recommendation to keep saturated fat below 6% of daily calories and the U.S. Dietary Guidelines' cap of 10%.

The risks of saturated fats are clear, as illustrated in this chart:

As saturated fat intake rises from 5% to 25% of daily calories, LDL cholesterol climbs from 100 to 160 mg/dL. The risk of heart disease more than doubles.

These aren’t abstract numbers—they represent lives shortened, families disrupted, and billions in preventable healthcare costs.

Kennedy's rhetoric may appeal to populist instincts. Still, it erodes trust in science and weakens the government's constitutional duty to "promote the general welfare." Public health policy must be grounded in evidence, not ideology. When the Secretary of Health and Human Services ignores science and promotes half-baked ideas, the health of millions of Americans is put at risk.

Kennedy’s framing of saturated fat as a victim of elite misinformation weaponizes distrust at a time when civic cohesion is already fraying. Dangerous medical narratives from the top health official in the federal government cannot be ignored.

This is not the first time Kennedy has promoted unscientific, potentially dangerous health practices. Kennedy's tenure as Secretary of Health has focused on debunked claims such as vaccines being linked to autism, the unfounded linkages of acetaminophen (Tylenol) use in children and pregnant women to autism, citing unverified studies, to name a few.

Kennedy has urged Americans to "stop trusting experts" and instead "do their own research," a stance that has drawn criticism from public health leaders.

The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is the chief executive of the federal agency responsible for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services. The Secretary oversees major public health institutions, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). His role includes setting national health policy, managing public health emergencies, regulating food and drug safety, advancing medical research, and administering programs that serve vulnerable populations, as well as playing a critical role in shaping federal responses to issues like pandemics, opioid addiction, mental health, and health equity.

In a joint statement in early October from six former Surgeons General (including Vivek Murthy, Jerome Adams, Richard Carmona, David Satcher, Joycelyn Elders, and Antonia Novello)

“The actions of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. are endangering the health of the nation. Never before have we issued a joint public warning like this.”

The person in this position must advocate policy rooted in science, not personal opinions or sentiment.


David Nevins is publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.


Read More

Medicaid Cuts Could Threaten Key Student Services at IL Schools

Monique McClure is a single parent to four children, two of whom rely on Medicaid-funded school services.

Photo courtesy of Monique McClure

Medicaid Cuts Could Threaten Key Student Services at IL Schools

Medicaid-funded school services are a lifeline and financial necessity for Monique McClure, a single mother of four, and her two children with learning disabilities.

Trent and Trenity, McClure’s 9-year-old twins, participate in a range of Medicaid-funded programs at their respective schools in Belleville, including speech, occupational, and developmental therapies.

Keep ReadingShow less
Focused athlete performing lateral raises with dumbbells, building shoulder muscles in a modern fitness center

This Mental Health Awareness Month essay explores Black masculinity, emotional wellness, HYROX training, therapy, and healing through movement.

zamrznutitonovi / Getty Images

Mental Strength Is More Than Toughness

May is Mental Health Awareness Month, but awareness alone cannot save us. Men of color are already painfully aware that something is wrong. We feel it in our sleeplessness. In our blood pressure. In the marriages that strain under emotional distance. In the fathers who never learned how to say “I’m not okay.” In the sons trying to inherit manhood from men who never permitted tenderness.

The crisis is not merely psychological. It is cultural, historical, spiritual, and physiological all at once. African Americans, particularly men, occupy one of the most paradoxical spaces in American life. We are hyper-visible in sports and entertainment. We are present in politics and public discourse. Yet we are emotionally invisible in matters of vulnerability, grief, anxiety, and depression. We are celebrated for resilience, but denied rest. Our toughness is admirable, while we are punished for transparency.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pregnant woman holding her belly during a prenatal exam.

Americans are questioning whether they have enough resources and support to raise a family in the nation's current political landscape. Julie Roland examines the contradictions of "pro-family" politics in America today and the kind of care mothers are owed to safely and successfully raise children.

Getty Images, Drs Producoes

The Trump Administration Has a Mommy Problem

My mother, who died of breast cancer when I was 18, had me when she was 32. This past Sunday, I turned 33, childless. As I officially fall behind her timeline, with no plans to have kids anytime soon, I look at the landscape of 2026 America and have to ask: Who can blame me?

The decision to start a family is a difficult one. J.D. Vance said on his first day as Vice President that he wants “more babies in America,” but many Americans simply can’t afford to have kids anymore. Perhaps that’s one reason why this administration is offering $5,000 “baby bonuses” just to incentivize birth, while also banning abortion in every way they can. But becoming a mother should be a choice. I was the result of an unplanned pregnancy–and I’m lucky my mom decided to have me and that she turned out to be the best mom ever–but as Miriam Rabkin, MD, MPH, put it: “if you want mom to be happy and healthy, she needs access to contraception so she can choose if and when to get pregnant!” Instead, this administration seems to think that if women won’t elect to have children, they should try paying them, and if that doesn’t work, then they should just force them.

Keep ReadingShow less
‘Women Will Die’: How the Mifepristone Ban Will Affect Women across the Country

In this photo illustration, packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic.

(Photo illustration by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

‘Women Will Die’: How the Mifepristone Ban Will Affect Women across the Country

WASHINGTON–Maternal health advocates and a Virginia state legislator warned that women’s health would suffer even in states that allow abortions if the Supreme Court fails to block a ban on mail deliveries of mifepristone, a drug used in abortions.

Jennifer McClellan, a representative for the state of Virginia and long-time advocate for reproductive rights, experienced a high-risk pregnancy and an emergency C-section 9 weeks before her due date. She said that she worried about the risks to individuals if they lose easy access to Mifepristone for abortions, miscarriages, or other reasons.

Keep ReadingShow less