Pod Save America - Are RFK Jr. & MAHA Coming for Your Vaccine?

Episode Date: June 29, 2025

Health Secretary RFK Jr. has gutted the CDC's vaccine advisory committee, replacing its members with a mix of anti-vaxxers, COVID contrarians, and medical non-professionals. What do these sweeping changes to our vaccine infrastructure—and the rise of the ironically named MAHA movement, short for Make America Healthy Again—mean for the health and well-being of everyday Americans? Dan sits down with epidemiologist and data scientist Katelyn Jetelina to unpack the implications of Kennedy's policies on flu season, COVID, and a broad range of preventable diseases. Katelyn also explains how the politicization of seed oils, food dyes, and fluoride distracts from the public health issues that actually matter—and shares what she learned from grassroots MAHA organizers about their uneasy alliance with MAGA.For a closed-captioned version of this episode, click here. For a transcript of this episode, please email [e-mail] and include the name of the podcast. 

Welcome to Potsdamerica, I'm Dan Pfeiffer. For our Sunday show this week, we're going to do a deep dive into Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Make America Healthy Again movement, and the dangerous changes to vaccine policy happening right now. While Trump's illegal deportations, unconstitutional airstrikes, and crypto scams get mostly attention,

R.F.K. Jr. is quietly dismantling the public health infrastructure that Americans have depended on for decades. These changes in the rise of the Maha movement are having a profound and dangerous effect on our science and our politics. My guest this week is someone who's been keeping tabs on Maha and RFK Junior since the very beginning.

Dr. Caitlin Jettelina began writing the sub stack, your local epidemiologist in the early days of the COVID pandemic, and it's now the platform's top science newsletter. She's an epidemiologist and data scientist and the co-host of the America Dissected podcast with former Crooked collaborator Dr. Abdul El-Sayed. I invited her on the show to discuss what this movement is, why it's resonating with

so many people, whether there's anything we can do to stop it. Caitlin Gennalina, welcome to Pod Save America. Thank you for having me. I'm honored to be here. I have so much I want to talk to you about. I have been thinking and worrying about what's happening with RFK Jr. and HHS and the Maha movement and vaccines for a long time. So we have a lot to get to,

but I want to start with this week's meeting of the CDC's advisory committee on immunization practices, the committee that sets vaccine policy in this country. Before we get into the specifics of this meeting, can you just like level set here on what that committee does, the role it plays and the changes that RFK Jr. has made to that committee that are concerning to so many? Yeah, sure.

So it's called ASIP, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. And it's basically an external committee of typically experts in vaccinology, pediatrics, medicine, epidemiology, I mean you name it. And it plays a really important role in the way we get vaccines and medical products from you know clinical trials all the way into people's arms and access. And so this is just one step in a really robust, I guess I'm saying this all before of everything that's changed, but-

Was, it was robust. Was, yeah, thank you. Was robust and grounded in evidence and very clear and really a well-oiled machine. And so their role in this process, so FDA first decides if like a vaccine is safe and effective. That's basically the two questions they're answering. And then it goes to ACIP, which is the advisory committee for CDC, and they basically decide, also they look at the evidence if it's safe and effective, but more importantly, the policy, who gets these vaccines, when, at what schedule, where, who's at high risk, et cetera. And then it gets signed by the CDC director and then it becomes available to us. So what's happened in these past, I can't believe it's only been like two weeks, is that RFK Junior

all of a sudden completely gutted ACIP. They were 17 members, really highly qualified for policy decision-making around vaccines, and basically handpicked eight people for their replacement. And these people that were replaced are people that, all the way from, have no experience whatsoever in vaccines, all the way to anti-vaxxers, some COVID contrarians, and really a mixed bag of wild people that are ultimately making decisions for 330 million Americans based on vaccines. This was always kind of a worry of ours in public health. The Health and Human Services Secretary has a number of levers to influence vaccine policy and uptake and access.

This was a huge red line that RFK Junior crossed and is very concerning. The original 17 people who were on the committee, were they appointed by the Biden administration? Are they long standing? Like how does, because you know, you could look at this in one way, which is, you know, when a new president, new administration,

or a new party comes in, there are a whole bunch of people who are in the government who are political appointees, who are on boards and commissions, they resign and they get replaced by people who are more ideologically aligned with the new administration. Is that, that's not typically what happens here though,

right? Well, you know, I'll be honest, the ASAP appointments have always been somewhat opaque, but usually you're right. The appointments last for about four years. Biden administration, I think they put eight of those last 17 members in there because that just is what those terms end. That's a turnover, right?

Yeah. It's just there's a turnover. Historically, I'll be honest, this process has been grounded in nonpartisan belief system, right? That vaccine policy should be shaped by science and experience and diverse perspectives, not ideology. And that hasn't changed for the past 70 years, whether it's a Republican or Democrat administration. So yeah, these appointments change over time. But it's never been based on necessarily ideology

like it has. It's never been just this sweeping gutting of it. And the process in which this has happened has been incredibly swift and obviously been planned for a couple months to execute very quickly. One of the critiques you hear from people in the Maha movement, the RFK sort of junior acolytes about ACIP and some of these other committees that advise FDA, CDC, HHS, is that their ties are too close to pharma, right? The people who profit from these vaccines. What is the real truth there? Are there any legitimate, you know, even grounded in the conspiracy theories of it? Is there any legitimate concerns there? I mean, I think it's a great point, right? We don't want people making policy decisions

if they have a conflict of interest in pharma stock. I mean, I think that's completely legitimate. The thing that has been missing though is that these committees go through incredibly rigorous conflicts of interest vetting. And what's even more interesting to me is that RFK Junior himself reaffirmed this process after he called for a full review of that ACIP, the last one's, committee's disclosures, and nothing was found. I think a few people got like $3,000 here and there, but nothing, no smoking guns that were insinuated and no systemic evidence of undue pharmaceutical influence on these members. I do find it highly

hypocritical because this new ACIP membership, also for sure they don't have the typical pharmaceutical conflicts of interest, but we can't ignore that there's other conflicts of interest out there, including selling of interest, but we can't ignore that there's other conflicts of interest out there, including selling of supplements, anti-vaccine advocacy groups, making millions off of vaccine litigation trials, and none of that's been disclosed. And some of these people are, they are proudly anti-vax, right? Like they have described themselves as that, right? This is not, this is not the pro-vaccine people ascribing people who

may have questions as for, but these people have called themselves anti-vax, right? That's right. I mean, even one of the members right after, like a week or two ago, Robert Malone, who we've always known as very anti-vax, he writes about it all the time, came out on Twitter and said,

everyone says, you know, anti-vax is a bad thing. I'm proud of it and And I'm excited to serve on this committee. I mean, they're not even hiding it. It's just the next level for it to watch unfold. This movement here is, it's in violation, at least of the spirit of what RFK Jr. probably promised during his confirmation hearings, right? Like he got a lot of questions about how he's going to handle vaccines and that science would lead it, the process would not be upended, but this is the upending of the process, right?

Oh, completely. I mean, and it's not a surprise, right, to all of us in public health that are very familiar with RFK. I mean, he's had a 20, 30 year history of ignoring evidence around vaccines and even, and sowing doubt in them. I mean, he founded Children's Health Defense,

which is an anti-vax advocacy group that makes millions. And so I guess this was not a surprise, but you're right. He did promise to Cassidy, who is the chair of the help committee, that he wouldn't upend ACIP. And he ended up doing it anyways. Cassidy got played. And I don't think there's ever been a question of what the intent is from RFK and vaccines. Podcasts of America is brought to you by the NPR Politics Podcast. Take it from us. Politics can be tough to talk about.

Yeah. You know? Yeah. Tough to explain. A lot of crazy stuff going on. But that's why the NPR Politics Podcast is where you can go to decode what goes down in Washington and what every decision out there might mean for me and you. Every day, the NPR politics podcast team will focus on one thing and boil it down

to 15 minutes or less. Think of it as your political multivitamin. That's why it's great. There's just like one topic you want to learn more about. They'll break it down. Just 15 minutes. Perfect for a, if you're driving to work. And we love the NPR Politics Podcast. Listen now to the NPR Politics Podcast,

only from NPR, wherever you get your podcasts. Do you ever look at political headlines and go, huh? Well, that's exactly why the NPR Politics Podcast exists. We're experts, not just on politics, but in making politics make sense. Every episode, we decode everything that happened in Washington and help you figure out what it all means.

Give politics a chance with the NPR Politics Podcast, available wherever you get your podcasts. So let's talk about what happened at the meeting this week. It took place Thursday and Friday. There were a number of items on the docket, including the flu vaccine, RSV, a couple of things. Tell us what happened there. Oh, it was exhausting to watch.

I mean, it was basically watching a fox in the hen house, or foxes in the hen house. You know, it followed the usual format. So if you just tuned in, it looked really legit. And some of it was, right? CDC scientists presented data and CDC scientists demonstrated really high competence, thorough, thoughtful, well-prepared, listened to questions, answered. But this new committee, I mean, it was just clear there are not vaccine experts. They questioned basic epidemiological methods. We tallied, my team tallied, more than 50 falsehoods

around vaccines mentioned in two days. It was very clear that with some of the decisions made, like around thimerosal and flu vaccines, that they began with conclusions and then attempted to force evidence to fit it. We call this policy-based evidence making, not evidence-based policy making. And so it was wild to watch.

I mean, it was sobering. I don't even know what the word is. And it really put into question what's gonna happen. And it really put into question what's going to happen. How does the health ecosystem, a broader health ecosystem, really step in to fill this gap? What are the legal implications, not only to our fall vaccines, but routine vaccines later on? I mean, it opened up, quite frankly, a lot of concern on my side. So what were the decisions they made? The most notable one involves thimerosal.

Can you talk about that? Right, so thimerosal is in some of our flu shots. It is used across the globe, and it is a preservative within our vaccines. It basically makes sure that some, the vaccine formula doesn't have bacteria. It's really helpful. But this committee, based on falsehoods, voted to not recommend thimerosal flu vaccines, which means that they won't be given this fall. Now, this isn't that big

of a deal. About four to seven percent of our supply has thimerosal flu vaccine. So I'm not concerned about the supply. I'm much more concerned about the groundwork in which they did and how this is going to apply in the future to other vaccines like hep B or HPV or measles vaccine, for example. I'm also very concerned about the ripple effects that will have on the global community, given that a lot of vaccines out there include thimerosal because it is safe. There's like literally no evidence to show it's unsafe. And then there's also possible implications on pandemic preparedness, biosecurity risk, and the need to use this in future vaccines. And so overall, not a big deal,

but does lay the groundwork. We're gonna be just on thimerosal. It's thimerosal has been part of a long running conspiracy theory tying it to autism, correctly? Yeah, it is. And there's no evidence to support that. Just we would be very clear on that, yes. Correct, it's very safe.

And it is based on basically in the mid 1990s, we didn't know too much about the toxicity. And so we actually removed thimerosal from the vaccines out of precaution. But since then, there's been so many studies that demonstrated that it's very safe, especially at the levels used in vaccines. OK. And now onto the other decisions. Okay. Other ones. The other decision was RSV, that we were going to have RSV protection.

In fact, we are going to have another monoclonal antibody for infants for RSV. And this is not a vaccine, but it basically gives us antibodies or gives our infants antibodies to protect against RSV. Interestingly, there was not a vote for COVID vaccines, and that is definitely not normal, and we need recommendations for fall. And so it leaves huge questions around what will be available to who and when this fall for COVID vaccines. And so what does that mean in practice?

If they never vote on it, will that mean there will be no COVID vaccines? How does that work exactly? I mean, I know we've never been down this road before, so you're speculating. Well, that's the big question, right? So I mean, we know right now that manufacturers are making vaccines. And they're based on last

year's formula, not this year's formula, because FDA now says we have to do placebo controls that are not feasible and unethical, whatever, but they're making them. The question is eligibility. And the reason that's a big question is because in July, in a few weeks, physicians and hospital systems need to order these vaccines. These vaccines then need to be distributed. Then the public needs to have an expectation of what to get where.

The physicians need to be educated. And so there's this, the insurers, we need to know if insurers are gonna cover it, right? Because usually insurers only cover what ACIP recommends. And so there's this domino effect of what happens after a June ACIP meeting in regards to fall. And there's just, there's so many unanswered questions. I'm not sure how this plays out. I do think what's going to happen is we're going to see the formation of professional societies like American Academy of Pediatrics make recommendations and maybe even like a shadow ACIP

to help fill this vacuum and get everyone, the fleet moving in the same direction. But I mean, time's a tick in and lives are on the stake. It's like, there are so many like interests that are in conflict here, right? Where you have, so it's like you have these pharma has made these vaccines, right? Who, and they wanna sell them.

Correct. You have insurance, which may not wanna cover them because, and so it's just like, it's very like, we're obviously in the like sort of very dangerous uncharted waters. When does the committee meet again? Do they meet every month? October, they meet three times a year.

So we will be into flu and potentially COVID, like the typical time, if I recall my many COVID shots I've had over the last five years here, we usually get the boosters in the fall, right? Like this is like, I think I get mine with the same time as my flu shot every year, right? Correct, yeah, yeah. And so it'll be October

before they could even make a decision. So it's possible everything's on hold till then. Oh, October, they won't even make a decision. They're onto the next thing. They'll be talking about measles and vaccine schedules and everything in October. And so this was the meeting for that. And that's why there's a lot of confusion.

And that's why the broader health ecosystem needs to step up. They need to find courage. They need to coordinate and have a united front to make sure that Americans have the confidence to make informed decisions. But they did approve the flu vaccine, right? Yes. Okay.

So what's, yeah, flu, RSV, I would say are guaranteed for and everyone over six months or whatever, the eligibility is there and you need to get protected. COVID's the big question. I mean, it seems like a pretty giant deal that the committee just took. I mean, I know a lot's happening in the world. That's one of the reasons why I want to have this conversation

is that there's so much happening around all the other stuff Trump's doing. We're bombing Iran. There's these deportations. They're all huge deals. And right underneath the surface, there's massive changes happening to how public health is done in this country with real-world implications

to every person. And it doesn't get the attention. In a different environment, the committee filled with anti-vaxxers taking a pass on even considering the COVID booster when we've done it for every year since the pandemic, seems kind of crazy to me. It is crazy.

And you're right, I do think it's going below the surface. I mean, I try with my newsletter not to. I know, you're doing everything you can, I know, I know. But you- That's why we're having this conversation, yes. Yeah, and there's a lot that people have to pay attention to. It's a magnetic storm and it's exhausting to keep up with everything.

But it's our job in public health to keep really close tabs on this and it's very concerning how it's unfolding right now. Does ASIP have to make recommendations on other long-standing vaccines? The one I'm thinking about most is MMR, the measles vaccine. I understand every year they're going to approve or not approve these new things that are coming up or new vaccines that come on the market. I'm not even going to get into what happens if we have another pandemic and they have to approve vaccines.

But just like we're in the middle of this measles outbreak, RFK Jr. and others have spread, you know, misinformation about the measles vaccine and how to deal with measles. In a normal world, would the committee weigh in and tell people to go get a measles booster or how would that work? Right. So, and this is what I actually think was the most concerning about this ACIP meeting this week, was watching them start to lay the groundwork for routine vaccinations. In fact, the ACIP chair announced two work groups that are gonna look into

the routine childhood vaccination schedule, and they're gonna revisit vaccines that, like hepatitis B and HPV and MMR vaccines. And so while they're very safe, they're very effective. I can kind of see where we are. We in public health see where this is going and incredibly concerned about the future of routine vaccinations. I think one question,

like you have a bunch of people who, you know, now on this committee or this is minority in the Maha movement or the anti-vax movement who have concerns about vaccines. And now you have people who have always believed in vaccines, who vaccinate their kids on schedule, who's got the COVID vaccine, get their boosters. And now we have these questions potentially

of a bunch of anti-vax cranks looking at our vaccines. Like what, like you say in here that FDA are the ones who ensure the safety and efficacy. Like how much fear should there be that in, that an RFK junior FDA is not, you know, even one gutted by the Elon Musk and Doge is not doing the, what they, that part of the process, right? So you have, even one gutted by the Elon Musk and Doge is not doing the, the, what they, that part of the process, right?

So you have, someone's got to test it, make sure it's right. And then you've got a bunch of people who's got to approve it. How do we feel about the process in the testing and efficacy part? All of this is like a checks and balances movement. And so with FDA, the interesting thing about FDA is you have counterbalances that have huge lobbyists, right? We're talking about like pharma and like stepping up. And so I think that if FDA did something shady, so because usually in these FDA meetings, pharma companies present the data and then FDA scientists present the data and you would,

the assumption is that they match because that means that everyone's working in honesty. I think when they start not matching, you're gonna hear an uproar from pharma. Give what you care about pharma companies, at least there's some sort of balance there. The challenge with CDC is there is no like counterbalance there. There's like not a lobbyist, I guess, that is like going to come out and be very angry that these policies are not

recommended. And so like, I think I'm a little less concerned with FDA than I am with CDC just because of that point. I don't know if that makes sense, but that's how I'm thinking about it. I don't want to trust big pharma. I understand. I know. But they do have a strong, if you believe that the problem with big pharma

is that they want to make money above all else, they do have a strong financial interest in having effective vaccines and safe vaccines, right? Like if they don't, that's bad business if what they care about is business. But like this is, I get this is sort of the end result of what the anti-vax people want is they wanna raise questions and all these things, right?

To be able to cope, like you can see, like you mentioned, they're gonna get to the schedules. It's one of the things you hear, you know, when you're a parent of a young child, like really I'm supposed to stick my kid with all of these vaccines at one time on one day and there's science for why you do it. But if they start raising questions about that, they're feeding doubt into the system. And that can metastasize over time.

Oh my God, yeah. And you know what? I think we need to ground ourselves and I try to think about this often. 95% of people agree with vaccines. When was the last time that many Americans agreed on something? And so what I'm very concerned about is that the very minority representation is now one, making these decisions, but also have this huge megaphone around this sort of stuff. And it's going to start chipping away

at that 90 plus percent of Americans. I'm very concerned about that. So yeah, we'll see how this plays out. We'll see. The last thing on vaccines here is RFK Junior announced that the US was no longer gonna contribute to the global, GAVI, the Global Vaccine Compact. Talk a little about what that means for the world.

Yeah, it's incredible. So incredibly bad. So GAVI is this international collaboration that provides vaccines to half of the world's children. I mean, we're talking about a ton of people here. And the Gavi just had a meeting this week where they basically plan for financial, it's financial planning for the next five years.

And RFK comes, he recorded a video and Gavi played it. And it basically said that US is removing its commitment to Gavi because of anti-vax and he just started spouting off anti-vax falsehoods. And so it wasn't necessarily about efficiency of the budget, it was literally anti-vax. And so it's going to create this huge hole. I mean we've saved billions of lives across the globe because of Gavi. The whole reason we needed Gavi was because there was a huge market gap for pharmaceutical companies because there wasn't really a market in low to middle income countries because they didn't have the money to pay for vaccines. And so it's, I don't know, I don't even know how to say it.

I mean, we're gonna lose lives to this. It is cruel, it's cruel. And it's also, I think it's important that it's also already congressionally appropriated funds through 2030, first of all. And HHS doesn't even control those funds, it's through the State Department. So again, another example of just completely

disregarding processes and lives will be lost because of it. And even like I'm of the view and call me a bleeding heart liberal here that we that saving children's lives around the world is like an end in of itself. But even if you were to say, I only care about what happens in our borders. It matters to the US that there aren't diseases spreading all around the world, right? Like, isn't that, isn't that, like, that's one of the reasons why we prevent global pandemics is to make sure that there aren't measles spreading all across or smallpox spreading all across

continents in the world, right? Right. I mean, we're a globalized world. I mean, we're just a train plane right away from any disease. And saving lives is really important to my value system, even beyond America. But if we're just thinking about America first, there is huge value in soft power around health and ensuring that other societies are healthy too. Infectious diseases violate the assumption of independence. What one person does directly impacts another person. And I hoped we learned that during COVID,

but apparently not. Apparently we learned the wrong lesson. It seems like, or at least the people in charge did. Pads of America is brought to you by Stratum and the Pads of America. Pod Save America is brought to you by strawberry.me. We spend what, about a third of our waking hours working? If you're lucky. And people feel stuck in jobs they've outgrown

or never wanted in the first place. We've heard it all. What if the next move is even worse? I've already put years into this place. Who am I without this title? And that's just love it. Ha ha ha ha ha. And hey, those feelings, they are real.

Your feelings are valid. But that's also why a lot of people are stuck. That's where strawberry.me comes in. They connect you with a certified career coach who helps you go from where you are to where you actually wanna be. Whether you're looking for a change, feeling stuck, facing a big decision,

or just seeking professional growth. With a coach, you get clear on your goals, create a real plan, build your competence, and they'll keep you accountable along the way. Coaches are thoroughly vetted and assessed for their qualifications and expertise and come from a wide range of backgrounds, experiences, and specializations.

Don't leave your career to chance. Take action, own your future with a coach in your corner. Head to strawberry.me slash crooked to claim your $50 credit and your corner. Head to strawberry.me slash crooked to claim your $50 credit and get started. That's strawberry.me slash crooked. Stop settling, start building the career you actually want. All right, let's pivot a little bit beyond vaccines to the Maha movement,

American America Healthy Again movement broadly, and RFK Jr's role in it. I mean, obviously he is someone who is proudly anti-vaxx. He has come to great national attention and in some parts of the country infamy for that position. But can you talk a little bit about his role and how he got here? Right. So yeah, he's always been kind of in this space of health and you know, it's really environmental, environmental and yeah, anti vaccine, but he's always been on the left, which I think is fascinating. But what we've seen over the past year, and this is what's interesting

is that this movement really came out of nowhere, maha, and really fast. As you know, Dan, there was a big movement back in 2010 with Michelle Obama around healthier eating, childhood obesity, blah, blah, blah, that was completely shut down by Republicans saying we're the nanny state, you can't take away my ultra processed foods. But this movement really came out of nowhere. There's this huge groundswell of support. And for us in public health, we were like, at first, we were like, all right, here we go. Like, let's do prevention.

Let's prevent chronic diseases. Let's fix the health care system. But then you start peeling off the branding and knowing RFK Junior's history. And you start looking at the details and solutions. And Maha really starts losing me and other public health colleagues. So, yeah, I mean, R.F.K. really created this grassroots movement and then hitched it to

MAGA and that's where we are today. Yeah, I understand, and this is something that would, this would be clipped socially, would come back to haunt me, but I sort of understand the appeal of part of the Maha movement. Like I live in the Bay Area.

I do too. I have, I'm a parent of young kids. I read Omnivore's Dilemma 20 years ago. I'm worried about the food system. I saw Michelle Obama plant a garden and talk about all these things and sugar and everything in our diet. You know, I like, my wife and I spend a lot of time

like thinking about like, what are the healthy snacks for our kids? Should we serve them, you know, food and glass as opposed to plastic and BP? Like we think about all of that. And you know, and because we have young kids in the area, like it's something that is like talked about a ton. I can't tell you how much the local first grade parents

WhatsApp chain is blowing up about the cinnamon rolls at free breakfast in the California public schools right now. We're very into this. But you can see, and because of that, I can see how the pipeline works. It starts with, oh, here are the healthy snacks you know, here are the healthy snacks for kids. Here's the recipes you should make. Here's the chemical free sunscreens or whatever else to all of a sudden, and I'm gonna get to some

of these specifics, the dangers of seed oils, fluoride, all of those things. And then red dyes, right? There's so much discussion about red dyes. Then you get to the vaccine stuff. And so this pipeline has been created. And like, as you say, not everyone in the Maha movement is anti-vax, right?

We were talking about 95% of people agreeing. And so you have a bunch of people who are on board with RFK Jr. For all the other, and this whole movement, this idea, for all the stuff that gets up to vax. Maybe they're gonna get moved to an anti-vax position should start asking questions around it. But it's the other stuff. And I think we as like me, people, my like political positions like myself can get into a dangerous place when you dismiss all the other concerns, not the solutions offered by

Muhammad, but the concerns as a bunch of anti-vax cranks. And, but I want to get, I want to go through some of the specifics because I have an actual scientist with me today on some of these things they're concerned about. And I'm going to start with seed oils. Okay. Which is like, I can't tell you how much seed oil content I see on Instagram and Tik Tok and the dangers of it.

What does the science say about whether seed oils are bad for you or worse for you than other oils? whether seed oils are bad for you or worse for you than other oils. Right, so seed oils are, just to back up a little, they are- Yeah, describe seed oils. Because most people say the word seed oil, don't know what it means, but yes. Yeah, they're extracted from, I mean, the seeds of plants,

like soybeans and canola and corn and sunflower and grape seeds. And this is in contrast to oils like olive or avocado oil that are extracted from fruits. But you're right, I mean, there's been this recent fear around seed oils and the reality is that they are part of a healthy diet. I mean, seed oils are particularly high

in this thing called polyunsaturated fats, which are important for heart health and cell function and metabolism and immune regulation. And our bodies can't make it on its own. We have to get it from food and seed oils are really important part of that. We've had huge studies showing the importance on like heart health for example. But you're right there's been a recent backlash right critics have called seed oils toxic or poisonous and even blame them on the chronic the rise of chronic disease we've seen in the United States and it's really based on you know conflicting evidence, correlation doesn't equal causation, some just plain

out rumors. Also, there's a lot of money in this that I don't think we can ignore, right? The wellness market profits off of fear. It's valued of over, I think, $6 trillion. And so people who demonize seed oils, for example, are also selling products that claim to reverse the damage, or detox, or seed oil alternatives, or a beef towel. And so a lot of this, I think, and the theme

around all of these topics, whether it's seed oils, or red dyes or fluoride is that our information landscape has just dramatically changed. It's really confusing on social media. And we've also unleashed this curiosity driven class, which I love. People are asking really tough questions.

It just means that we have to rise to that occasion. All right, so let's talk food dyes. Like this is the one you see all the time. The argument is while there haven't been studies, there have been these, and I saw that in an interview with the head of the FDA in Megyn Kelly recently where he, Megyn Kelly was very concerned that she was gonna make a birthday cake for her daughter

that had, and she looked at the icing and it had all these red dyes in it. And then the FDA head went on this long thing about the dangers of dyes. And then although there weren't studies on it per se, there's a lot of anecdotal evidence of parents who took their kids off dyes. You hear all the time, uh, the dyes we use in America are banned in Europe. If you buy Froot Loops here and Froot Loops in Canada, they look very

different because of the dyes. It's like, what is, what is the reality about the dyes we use compared to the other countries and what are the risks of dyes. So it's like, what is the reality about the dyes we use compared to the other countries and what are the risks of dyes at all? Because I mean, they're being banned in states across the country. Even here in California, the governor, Newsom signed a bill that did it in school lunches,

I believe. But it's like, what's the reality here? Yeah, first of all, the reality is contrary to popular belief, a lot of these dyes are allowed in Europe. They are not banned. They just have different names, right? They have different names. I'm like, guys, come on. Let's start. Anyways, so they have different names. So first of all, yeah, it's not banned in Europe. There has been some rat studies that have looked at red dyes. When we look at it in human studies, at the dose,

we usually get it. There is no harm around it. With substances, dose is the toxin. I mean, water can be toxic if we have enough of it. And I think, fine. If you want to take out red dyes, fine, but like candy is also still candy at the end of the day. And I also think that with this red dye discussion,

and honestly a lot with Maha, with this individualistic approach, it fails to look at the trade-offs at a population level. And it'll be interesting to see what those trade-offs are for red dyes. But natural colors are more expensive to make. They're less consistent, and they have less shelf life, which means higher food costs and potentially more food waste.

And so there's a trade-off for people that can't afford these very expensive foods. And we are really losing, what is this saying? The forest for the trees. The forest for the trees, yeah. Because there are huge changes that need to be made to our food systems. Red dye is like the small, it's like going to be turning our wheels to fix the chronic health problems. We're not tackling these root causes, which is frustrating to see. There would probably be no health downside to switching to beet juice for red dye, where

I think that's the natural alternative. But the argument against would be, I guess, I'm going to just drill down this. One, food costs would go up. That's one of the reasons why we have these dyes and these chemicals. the argument against would be, I guess just wanna like kind of just drill down this one, food costs would go up. So that's one of the reasons why we have these dyes and these chemicals, they would spoil more. And ultimately the big thing is we're not focused on the things,

like we should be getting kids to eat less candy period, not less candy with dye, is sort of the way you'd say it. Right, and like food deserts and food insecurity and industry influence and like all of these big things that really impact behavior. And I don't think this is it. I think the other interesting thing is, yeah, you're right with shelf life and making it more expensive.

Also, it's important to know some people are allergic to beets, right? So some of these natural colors may pose an individual risk with food allergies too. So there's important implications, but like we need to step back. And if we really gonna move this needle in the United States for health. So let's do fluoride now.

Florida, the state of Utah has now banned adding fluoride to public drinking water. I mean, really for most of my life, when you've ever heard anyone talking about fluoride in the water, it was like a real sign that they were a kook, right? Like he would cross the street if someone was talking to the other side of the street

if they're talking about fluoride. And now that's becoming public policy. What is the truth here, especially given how much fluoride we get in our toothpaste and all of that? Yeah, so fluoride is really important for our teeth. This is why toothpaste contains fluoride, why dentists apply it to us directly. I think the question that's being debated right now is whether we should add it to our

public water supplies. We started adding fluoride in the mid-1900s because, and it really helped decrease cavities, like an incredible amount. I think that once we've started introducing fluoride in toothpaste, the benefit is definitely more modest. Like, let's be honest with that, right? Like it's, and especially, well, I'll get to that in a little, but it's definitely more modest,

but there still shows clear improvement. For example, we've had case studies, like in Calgary, they banned fluoride in just five years, cavities increased almost twofold, and use of antibiotics increased eightfold, right, due to bacteria in teeth, and they ended up putting it back in fluoride in 2021. So we still see it's important.

But what's even more important is that, and this is where public health comes in, is that the public water system reaches everyone equally. And so fluoridation mitigates the impact of disparities and access to dental care in the United States. Low income families struggle to one fine dentist that take their insurance like Medicaid. If they have insurance at all, right. If they have insurance at all, right?

If they have insurance at all. There's definitely dentist deserts, right? So access is an issue. And even going beyond cavities, poor dentition can be a source of stigma for our kids in schools. And I think that this really highlights what public health is,

is that it's an invisible intervention. You don't really think about it much. It's incredibly safe at the doses we receive, and it benefits the most vulnerable. And so when we remove fluoride, me and San Diego and my kids are going to be just fine. We go to the dentist, we can afford toothpaste. But what I'm very concerned about is the health disparities gap is just gonna increase and increase. And that has major implications for Americans.

Would you say in all the concerns we have about our water in this country, fluoride is low on the list, right? Like between pollution and chemicals. It's so low. Yes. It's just sort of the point here, right? Which is like what we're bringing, this is what I think one of the dangers

of the maha movement, because it's taking a legitimate concerns about health, a broken food system, trying to feed a family on a limited budget or what they're fed at school, right? Like you wanna do that, but then the answers are not answering the real problems and they're kind of distracting from the real things

that we should be addressing, right? It's totally true. And that's what's so confusing with this Maha movement. I mean, Dane, you mentioned you're totally gain for some of these things and I am too, but it's mixing really reasonable statements with one outright falsehoods, but also two, not the solution, which will keep our wheels spinning. They're distractions or misdiagnoses.

We don't have time. Our health isn't great in the United States. We need to do things better and it's hard to watch. More from a conversation with Caitlyn Jenelena after this break, but first some housekeeping. If you like Positive America, you'll love my newsletter The Message Box, which dives deep into what's happening in our politics, how Democrats can return to power and has actionable ideas on how each and every one of us can do our part to defeat MAGA. In my latest post out this morning, I wrote about the lessons that every Democrat running up and down the ballot in districts as blue as New York City and red as West Virginia can learn from Zoran Mondani's

incredible victory in New York City. If you want to follow along and join the conversation, head to the incredibly cringeworthy, incredibly embarrassing website, crooked.com slash yes, we Dan to unlock a 30 day free trial of message box for positive America listeners. The Supreme Court's conservative supermajority just paved the way for red states to defund Planned Parenthood. Their decision undermines access to abortions, cancer screenings, and all reproductive health care from millions and millions of people on Medicaid across the country.

Our friends at Vote Save America have a fund to support impacted Planned Parenthoods and their patients. Go to votesaveamerica.com slash support to make a donation right now. Paid for by Vote Save America. You can learn more at vote safe America dot com. This ad has not been authorized by any candidate or candidates committee. Pod save America is brought to you by simply safe as we work toward a better future.

It's important to protect what's ours today. That's why we trust Simply Safe. Their proactive security system doesn't just react to crime, it prevents it. With their highly advanced cameras and live monitoring agents, Simply Safe is leading the way in home security, helping millions of Americans stay safe

before trouble even arrives. John Lovett himself has set up a Simply Safe and he's lived to tell the tale. It's really easy to do. You customize it for your space. It comes, you can set it up very, very quickly. They make it super easy. Then once it's set up, completely reliable

and the customer support is great, the app is great. Gives you peace of mind, highly recommend it. Most security systems only take action after someone breaks in. That's too late. SimplySafe's new Active Guard outdoor protection helps stop break-ins before they happen. If someone's lurking, agents talk to them in real time,

turn on spotlights and can call the police, proactively deterring crime before it starts. No contracts, no hidden fees. It's named the best home security system of 2025 by CNET. Four million plus Americans trust Simply Safe. It's ranked number one customer service by Newsweek and USA Today. Monitoring plans start around a dollar a day,

60 day money back guarantee. Visit simply safe.com slash crooked to claim 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan and get your first month free. That's simply safe.com slash crooked to claim 50% off a new system with a professional monitoring plan and get your first month free. That's simply safe.com slash crooked. There's no safe like simply safe. So you've done something that not a lot of people do, which is you've actually engaged with members of the Maha movement, not just by seeing their content on Instagram. You've actually met with them.

Can you talk a little about how those conversations came to be and what you learned from them? I did. I was invited, a good friend, Brenda Akari, was the executive producer for John Stewart, but also co-hosts a podcast, Why Should I Trust You? And invited a couple of us in public health to meet with Maha Grassroots.

And I'll be honest, at first I was like, hell no. Like they are in the middle of this destruction that I'm seeing with public health, no way. But I ended up going, I went in after a lot of wrestling with a goal of about 75% listening and 25% speaking my truth. And we've met a couple times since that first time, been doing texts.

And I'll be honest, like that first conversation was one of the most raw, honest, and important conversation I think I've ever had in my professional career. I learned a lot about the Maha movement, what drives them to do this, how they view life. I was able to tell my truths as well, like slashing Medicaid's not gonna help, make America healthy again.

And these have turned over time into relationships and where we can learn from each other, we can agree to disagree. But also what I've also seen is that we can partner on things that I agree with, that we have common ground and it's been a fascinating journey, I'll say that. What did you learn about how someone, about how they ended up in this place?

Like what are the values that drive them there? Yeah, you know, we were talking about this earlier, but Maha is not a monolith, right? It's a very eclectic group of people. You have Democrats, you have Republicans, you have independents, you have anti-vaxxers, you have pro-vaxxers. I mean, it's a huge group.

And so, but what I learned was a common theme is that everyone in this room has had a story of heartbreak, betrayal and mistrust from the health system. Whether it was a mom caring for an adult with autism or a family ripped apart from the opioid epidemic or a small business owner that had to survive pandemic shutdowns, they were lived experiences, right? They're painful, they're messy, they're very human. And what matters the most to them is that these systems that were built to protect people didn't show up for them when they needed it. And so they are going to other sources and other voices that see that and respond to that. The other really interesting thing I learned, and I was genuinely surprised

about this, was that some of the members acknowledged that hitching their movement to the broader MAGA movement was a risky bet and actually very much grappling with those consequences right now, right? Because there are cuts to research on diabetes or food access or maternal health and it's really hurting their ability to make progress. And so while they're all very supportive of Kennedy's vision, I think some believe that blind allegiance to MAGA is hindering their development of solutions and I say yes, it is. So, you know, yeah, I've learned a lot and these discussions have been incredible. That was one of the things that I've been very curious about, because you can look, if you take everything that these folks believe in good faith, right? And you

can see like RFK junior saying what they want to hear on food dyes and processed foods. And then if you are anti-vax, obviously it's doing exactly what you want, much of the detriment of the country and the world. But then everything outside of HHS is doing the opposite of what Maha wants, right? Like they, like we're talking about seed oils, like gotta stop seed oils. The top lobbyists for the seed oil association has a senior role at the Department of Ag. Everyone is so worried about glyphosate, right? The herbicide used in Roundup

and then in getting that out of our food and it shows up in our fruit and vegetables, whatever else. And you have the EPA cutting the regulations that would govern and prevent these chemicals from getting in our food and water. I mean, all the regulations that would govern and prevent these chemicals from getting in our food and water. I mean, all the regulations that Obama and Biden put in about clean air, clean water, getting gutted. And then if you carry just like healthy food,

they've gutted the program, they've ended the program that helps schools buy food from local farms. From us. Yeah, and I've just been very curious if there is, if they like, how aware they are of that tension and whether it makes them, you know, I'm glad to know you see that there are some questions, but like how aware are they of that stuff?

And I guess the other question is like, maybe the leaders are aware, but I'm assuming maybe the members of the movement, not the ones who were like showing up at meetings, but who now identify in Maha and have these concerns are even aware of that stuff. Yeah, I mean, you know, I think that they're definitely aware, I will say very aware of Medicaid cuts.

They're very concerned about that as they should be. Very aware of SNAP benefits being cut for 2 million kids that rely on this for food. And so, I think that they are aware of some of that. They're not aware, I'll be honest, about other things that I've tried to keep them up to date on, like cutting clinical trials for diabetes or cancer research. Because, like we said, at the top of the hour,

there's just so much to pay attention to. I think the ultimate question they come to answer is, are we making more progress within MAGA than when we wouldn't have been through there? And what their conclusion is is yes, is that even though we've hitched our wagon to this, we're still doing some important work and that was better than before.

And I think that they hang their hat on that. You know, you brought up Michelle Obama, her healthy food initiatives when she was first lady and I worked at the White House. And when I put on my quasi-retired political strategist hat and I look at this and I'm like, these are, the people who have these concerns are people who used to be democratic voters, right?

Like I'm not getting into like the core anti-vaxxers even though a lot of people were on the left pre-COVID, but the people who really are worried about broken food system, worried about clean air and clean water, how you feed your healthy kids. And I always think about Vani Hari, who for people who don't know is someone known as Food Babe,

who is the, probably the most influential food influencer. She's become like a leader in the Maha movement. She sat behind RFK Jr. during his confirmation hearings. She was an Obama delegate in 2012. Oh, I didn't know that. And like at some point, yes, and had volunteered on the campaign in 08, like a true blue Democrat,

and she was doing food influencing back then. She started Food Babe in 2011. And like at some point, the Democratic Party lost these people. Do you have any sense or theories about how that happened or how we can communicate with them better? I mean, I think that the larger Democratic Party, now we'll get into just politics,

but has lost the thread and is not responsive to the needs on the ground. I think a lot of what Democrats and public health I'll just say, hear and sound like is defending the status quo. And people aren't, the status quo isn't good, right? We're very sick. We have these, you know, profit-led health systems and people are done with it. And so I do hope that people see this groundswell, that they listen to these concerns

and provide alternatives to RFK Junior. I'll say, I think, you know, through these discussions with Maha, one of the most hopeful things is I've seen a ton of opportunity that there's these huge fractures between Maha and MAGA. Well, guess who else cares about making Americans healthy? It's public health, it's Democrats.

And so what is the strategy for that? I mean, one example is I'm surprised no political party has taken up healthcare costs. And I think that's a huge opportunity right now to gain a groundswell, to create a movement and to push us forward to a better healthcare system. So I guess that, I mean, I think that people move because people weren't being listened to. And- Or being spoken to, I think in this case.

Spoken to or spoken with, right? Like in beige. Yeah, exactly. It is like, it is like RFK Jr., long before he was running for president and then becoming H.S. Sartori, was like omnipresent in the wellness space, right? He's talking to Mark Hyman, he's on all the podcasts,

he's talking to Vani Hari, he's doing all these things. And there was no democratic voice there. Like that in, from 2008 to 2012, you had Michelle Obama, she was doing those things. It was easier in that information ecosystem that if the first lady of the United States, you know, was talking about these things that everyone in the world would hear about it

because then, you know, it worked. But now we're all in these information bubbles and these like, these interests a lot. You know, like work, but now we're all in these information bubbles and these like, I'd like these interests a lot, you know, like the way I was thinking about this from a communication perspective is we now, because of the way Instagram and TikTok and YouTube work, like the world's on an interest graph, like is what you're interested in is going to send you down a path. And so the people who are opting into wellness and health and that sort of stuff are not people that we have been, we have not been going, Democrats have not been going into those spaces

to speak to those people. And so, conspiracy theorists love a vacuum, right? And there is a vacuum. I mean, there's a clear vacuum. And you're right. I think that largely Democrats have this top-down approach to communication where information flows linearly. We are the experts in the ivory towers, blah, blah, blah. What Republicans do and Maha does incredibly well is this bottom-up

approach is you talk to people, you activate networks, you meet their needs. And people love that. And I don't, I love that. Like I wouldn't, I don't blame them for that, but like let's do it in an evidence-based ways where we really need to step up. Have you thought about, you know, from a public health perspective, right? Like, like I come at it from a political persuasion

perspective, how do we get these voters back? How do we persuade them about what, you know, what they're, what Trump and RFK are doing is wrong. But like ultimately we have to communicate, you know, that it's the role, the job of public health to communicate people how to keep their family safe, what vaccines to take. Have you thought about if the Maha movement

taught you anything about how the public health world should communicate differently with the public? Oh my gosh, yeah. I mean, I've been on this adventure the past five years just doing my newsletter. I've like learned a ton about this. But you're right. There's a value of nuance. Never underestimate the public. They want to know what mRNA is, what red dyes are, and if they're safe. I think there's huge power in trusted

messengers. So how do we start engaging physicians and librarians and whoever that people get their information and trust also? There's this importance of meeting people where they're at. And the thing I think we're missing the most is creativity needed to develop these two-way streets, like with Maha group. In these Maha discussions discussions after I was like,

hey, can you guys help me write, just look over my FAQs around routine vaccinations? And they sent me back this incredible feedback and it was, and even better, and I was like, I integrated their feedback and they wanted an added question answered. And I just sent it back saying, so thank you so much for doing these routine vaccination questions. And they're like, no problem. We sent this out into the entire Maha network. And so there's this value of engagement and co-develop bridge and I hope that public health needs to learn that as quickly as possible. The Democratic Party needs to learn that as quickly as possible or there's going to be continue to be a void as well as that's just how communities thrive and we need to empower individuals at this moment.

Do you think this group would be open to talking with someone like a Democrat, like Cory Booker, who's a vegan and has talked a lot about our broken food system in a lot of ways would think they would want to engage with someone like that? Yeah. I mean, I think that what I have heard them say to me at least is everyone treats Maha like they're radioactive and so I think that there's really opportunity. I mean, I'll be honest, they're kind of radioactive in some things, but like there's other things that it's really worth engaging on. And we've seen that.

I mean, they've started talking to other public health leaders around Medicaid. We're partnering with nutrition. We're partnering with toxic water. And so it's happening. I think it just matters of everyone take a deep breath. Like, let's try to find that common ground and work from there. Last question for you. If one of the like I'm like we're having this car super because I'm sort

of obsessed with the wellness to Mahanamaga pipeline, how we get these people back, the Vani Hari Obama delegate to RFK junior surrogate thing like haunts me in my brain. Like how did we lose that person like that? We should not be losing Obama delegates to become RFK junior acolytes. But one of the things is that I would hope that as Democrats move forward, we would come up with our version of a Maha agenda, like what we would go to these people, go to just, it's not just the people who self-idea as Maha, but like just people who have legitimate concerns about our food system, chronic disease in this country, worried about their parents, their kids, et cetera. In addition to healthcare costs, are there other things you think that Democrats should be talking

about that would be persuasive but also more effective than these sort of obsessions with seed oils and red dyes and those sorts of things? We need to provide an alternative path. I mean, it's that simple. I mean, what is our plan, right? Our plan is not to go back to 2024, 2019. Like, what do we want to see in the world? How, what is our solutions to this fucked up healthcare system? I've been thinking about this a lot. In fact, I don't know if I should admit this, but like, I started writing like a project 2029 for

HUB, because I'm like, someone just needs to start, you know, part of this, you know, the past six months have been defense. And I'll be honest, like that defense is really important, especially in public health when it's getting distracted. But also, also you need an offense of like, where do we want to go? What is valuable?

What are Americans saying? And meet them where they're at. And so that's just not something I've seen. And it's been quite, um, uh, depressing, but also, uh, it tells me why. We lose people, right? We lost people to RFK junior and, um, we need to do a whole lot of work to, uh, plan ahead and, uh, try, try to lead down a different path that we see matches our value systems.

Well, Caitlin, thank you so much for this conversation. We started off quite scary and alarming. I think we've ended at a relatively helpful place. As you put the finishing touches on your project, 2029 Healthy America Agenda, let's talk again, because I'm very fascinated in this, and this has been a really great conversation. Absolutely.

Thanks so much for having me, Dan. That's our show for today. Tommy Love will be back with a brand new show in your feed on Tuesday morning. If you want to listen to Pod Save America ad free or get access to our subscriber discord and exclusive podcasts, consider joining our Friends of the Pod community at crooked.com slash friends or subscribe on Apple podcasts directly from the Pod Save America feed. Also, please consider leaving us a review to help boost this episode and everything we do here at Crooked. Pod Save America is a Crooked media production. Our producers are David Toledo, Emma Illick-Frank,

and Saul Rubin. Our associate producer is Farah Safari. Austin Fisher is our senior producer. Reed Cherlin is our executive editor. Adrian Hill is our head of news and politics. The show is mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Jordan Cantor is our sound engineer with audio support from Kyle Seglund and Charlotte Landis. Matt DeGroote is our head of production. Naomi Sengel is our executive assistant. Thanks to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Hayley Jones, Ben Hefkote, Mia Kelman, Carol Pellavive, David Tolles, and Ryan Young. Our production staff is proudly unionized with the Writers Guild of America East.