Former CDC chief medical officer says RFK Jr. caused ‘irreparable harm’

Dr. Debra Houry Condemns RFK Jr.'s Impact on CDC's Credibility

Former CDC official highlights eroding public trust under new HHS leadership

Former CDC chief medical officer says - Dr. Debra Houry, who previously served as the chief medical officer at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), has voiced strong criticism of the agency’s direction under the leadership of Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Her remarks, shared during an interview with Margaret Brennan on CBS News’s “Face the Nation,” underscore concerns about the damage inflicted on public health credibility.

“I think the secretary has caused a lot of irreparable harm, and when you look at many of the polls out there, the trust in public health, specifically the CDC, has decreased dramatically, over 20 points in many polls,” Houry stated.

Houry emphasized that the decline in trust is a significant challenge for the agency. She pointed out that states have begun removing links to the CDC website and are following other medical organizations more closely, a shift she believes undermines the agency’s authority. “I don’t know how you build back that trust overnight,” she added, highlighting the difficulty of reversing such a trend.

Since assuming the role of HHS secretary in February 2025, Kennedy has taken decisive steps to reshape the CDC’s operations. One of his earliest moves was to replace the agency’s director, Susan Monarez, in August of the same year. The dispute centered on vaccine policy disagreements, which not only led to Monarez’s departure but also triggered Houry’s resignation after over a decade of service at the CDC.

Kennedy’s influence extended beyond leadership changes. He also overhauled the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, appointing individuals aligned with his vision. This shift resulted in revised guidelines for childhood immunizations, reducing the number of recommended shots for children. While the policy adjustments aimed to streamline recommendations, they sparked controversy among public health experts and advocates.

In March, a federal judge intervened, halting Kennedy’s effort to add more than a dozen new members to the CDC panel and blocking the implementation of the updated vaccine schedule introduced by HHS in January. The court’s decision suggested growing skepticism about the rapid changes in public health protocols, raising questions about the thoroughness of the process.

Kennedy’s tenure has also been marked by public health challenges. Notably, measles outbreaks surged in multiple states during his leadership, reigniting concerns about vaccine hesitancy. Simultaneously, the CDC’s role in tracking mortality rates saw a shift in its prominence. Influenza and pneumonia, which ranked as the 11th-leading cause of death in the U.S. in 2024, climbed to the eighth-leading cause by 2025, reflecting broader health trends and policy impacts.

These developments have coincided with a noticeable decline in public confidence in federal health agencies. According to a poll conducted by Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the de Beaumont Foundation’s Public Health Listening Lab from March 19 through April 1, only 50 percent of 2,205 U.S. adults expressed trust in the CDC’s health recommendations. This marked a stark contrast to the 77 percent trust reported in a similar survey during spring 2025, following the agency’s revised guidelines.

Houry’s critique highlights the long-term implications of these changes. She argues that the erosion of public trust could have lasting effects on health outcomes, particularly for vulnerable populations. “When people doubt the science or the authority of the CDC, it becomes harder to implement effective public health measures,” she explained, noting that the agency’s credibility is foundational to its mission.

The debate over the CDC’s direction has also drawn attention to the broader implications of policy shifts. Critics argue that Kennedy’s emphasis on aligning with alternative viewpoints has created a perception of inconsistency. For example, the advisory panel’s decision to lower the number of recommended vaccines for children has raised questions about the balance between innovation and evidence-based practices.

Public health professionals remain divided on the effectiveness of these changes. While some support the reevaluation of guidelines, others warn that the rapid modifications could confuse the public and weaken adherence to critical health interventions. Houry, however, remains steadfast in her assessment, believing that the damage to the CDC’s reputation has already been substantial.

As the debate continues, the HHS secretary’s policies are being scrutinized for their impact on both public health and institutional integrity. With trust levels fluctuating and health outcomes shifting, the CDC faces a pivotal moment in its history. Houry’s comments serve as a reminder of the importance of maintaining public confidence in the face of evolving scientific and political landscapes.

The recent data from the Harvard and de Beaumont Foundation poll underscores the urgency of addressing these concerns. With over half of Americans questioning the CDC’s guidance, the agency must work to rebuild its standing. This effort will likely involve transparent communication, collaboration with trusted medical bodies, and a commitment to evidence-based decision-making.

As the nation grapples with these challenges, the role of the CDC remains central to shaping health policy. Kennedy’s leadership has introduced new dynamics, but the agency’s ability to adapt without compromising its core mission will determine its future trajectory. For Houry, the key issue is not just policy changes, but the lasting effect they have on public perception and health outcomes.