HANK GREELY: Tackle health-care problems to stop the chaos
At the end of 2024, I worried that the incoming administration might decide to protect company profits over the interests of people receiving medical care. Sure enough, the protections for patients provided by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have been weakened in 2025 — not so much by commercial interests as by ideology and chaos. At one point, the FDA lost almost 20% of its staff members, and the CDC about one-third. And much of the data needed for public-health research have been removed from websites. As a law professor, it’s hard to know what I will be able to teach in my FDA law class this year.

‘Shattered’: US scientists speak out about how Trump policies disrupted their careers

The questioning of vaccine safety by Robert F. Kennedy Jr, who leads the US Department of Health and Human Services, and the weakening of recommendations for childhood vaccination schedules, are just two examples of how ideology can harm human health. More people will get ill and die. The rise in measles cases exemplifies the dangers. In 2025, there were more than 2,000 reported measles cases in the United States — more than in any year since 1992, and ten times the annual averages since then. At least three people have died. This epidemic started before Inauguration Day in January 2025, resulting at least in part, from increased vaccine hesitancy after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Going forwards, much depends on those who control the FDA and the CDC. FDA drug approvals, for example, are out of the hands of researchers, as are decisions on what data to collect and disseminate on what medical conditions. Political will is needed to rebuild strong agencies. If faced with public discontent, mid-term election results that go against the administration might push it to rethink its approach. Pressure from the biopharmaceutical and health-care industries — which need strong federal regulatory agencies to create confidence in their products — could also encourage a return to science-backed policies.

But state governments can help, as can professional societies and health-care organizations. These bodies can make recommendations, and in some cases decisions, on which vaccines and treatments should be used on the basis of sound science. And they can provide accurate information, for instance about the safety of Tylenol (also called paracetamol and acetaminophen) in pregnancy and about the use of aluminium in vaccines.

Limiting the damage will not be easy, but all those involved in medicine and bioscience need to speak out, with friends and in public, against federal government misinformation and harmful actions. That will be scary, with no guarantee of success. But it is already clear that ignoring the problems just lets the chaos grow.