MAHA children’s health report under fire for bias and failures to link health to hunger
The new US Presidential Commission to Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) report on childhood chronic disease is facing backlash for regurgitating bias and failing to link deeper issues linked to health.
Amid sweeping budget cuts to food aid under the Trump administration, the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) emphasizes that the report does not connect hunger and health, even though federal nutrition programs are essential for supporting children’s health by reducing hunger.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) calls out “cherry-picking” information that backs Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s biases on vaccines and seed oils.
Meanwhile, Kennedy stated: “We will end the childhood chronic disease crisis by attacking its root causes head-on — not just managing its symptoms. We will follow the truth wherever it leads, uphold rigorous science, and drive bold policies that put the health, development, and future of every child first.”
The commission will create a Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy to address the report’s findings.
No healthy children without zero hunger
Crystal FitzSimons, president of FRAC points to almost 14 million children living in households that cannot get access to the nutrition they need, threatening their growth and increasing chronic disease risk. “Hunger is a major driver of poor health and must be addressed as a public health crisis.”
FRAC and CSPI criticize the administration’s budget cuts to SNAP and other children’s programs that will worsen hunger and nutrition access (Image credit: HHS).“Decades of research have shown that federal nutrition programs, which include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), School Breakfast Program, National School Lunch Program, Child and Adult Care Food Program, summer and afterschool nutrition Programs, and Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), are not only critical for addressing hunger but also serve as vital interventions for supporting the health of children and their families.”
She urges more investments in such programs that will result in thriving children, lower health costs, and better economies.
“The MAHA Commission report is being released on the heels of the House GOP passing a budget bill that would lead to more negative health outcomes for children and families by slashing SNAP — our nation’s first line of defense against hunger — by US$300 billion,” FitzSimons warns.
The cut will increase health care spending and add strain to families and systems already spread thin. “Rather than promoting health, this bill threatens to reverse decades of progress in nutrition and public health,” FitzSimons states.
“We urge the Commission to take a more productive path by uplifting the extensive research supporting the value of these programs and to heed our recommendations to protect and strengthen the federal nutrition programs to create a healthier, stronger America.”
Biases saturate the report
CSPI’s president, Dr. Peter G. Lurie, criticizes the report for recycling Kennedy’s biases, which are supported by a narrow selection of literature.
“In many instances, even when the report has a good idea, like increasing consumption of whole, unprocessed foods, the remedies suggested are at odds with efforts of Kennedy, [US President Donald] Trump, [Tesla Motors CEO Elon] Musk, and Republicans in Congress to decimate the federal workforce and government spending.”
“How is the American diet to improve when Republicans are hell-bent on cutting SNAP benefits, slashing school meals, ripping millions of Americans from their health insurance coverage, withdrawing proposed rules that would reduce foodborne Salmonella, and laying off food inspectors?” he points out.
Lurie highlights that the administration has cut programs bringing local food to schools, nutrition and health funding, and an office preventing lead poisoning in children, while threatening access to vaccines.
“We appreciate Kennedy’s interest in things like synthetic food dyes and aspartame — which, to be clear, we’d be better off without — and his concern over ultra-processed foods may be well intended. If he wants to address ultra-processed foods, proposed rules on front-of-package labeling and sodium reduction are in the Federal Register awaiting his signature (both proposals go unmentioned in this report).”
“But while Americans are consuming too much soda and other ultra-processed junk foods, this administration is actively working to push healthy foods out of reach for millions of people. Who wants to take nutrition advice from someone who’s trying to take food out of your mouth?”
