Trump's surgeon general pick exposes cracks in MAHA movement
President Trump's second choice for U.S. surgeon general has set off a wave of infighting within the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement.
Casey Means is a prominent health influencer and ally of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but she is seen as insufficiently skeptical of vaccines by some of his prominent supporters — and a 'total crack pot' by others in Trump World.
Trump chose the Stanford-educated doctor-turned-chronic disease entrepreneur to be surgeon general after withdrawing his first pick Janette Nesheiwat, a former physician and Fox News host. Means, like Kennedy, has focused much of her health advocacy on diet and nutrition.
'Bobby really thought she was great. I don't know her. I listened to the recommendation of Bobby,' Trump said of Means. 'I met her yesterday and once before. She's a very outstanding person. A great academic, actually. So I think she'll be great.'
Nesheiwat's nomination was withdrawn the day before her Senate confirmation hearing, after media reports called her credentials into question and conservative figures attacked her for praising the COVID-19 vaccines.
Like Kennedy, Means has expressed skepticism about vaccines, promotes food as medicine and is critical of the current health care system. But the pick was unpopular with other health influencers aligned with Kennedy.
'I can't help but think this is a very carefully groomed and selected person. Just about no clinical experience. Talks a great game about everything but vaccines. Feels all wrong,' said Suzanne Humphries, a medical researcher who, like Means, has appeared on Joe Rogan's podcast.
'She's not a health freedom advocate,' Mike Adam, who goes by Health Ranger, wrote on social platform X. 'She's not a vaccine truther. She'll never recommend natural cancer cures or remedies. She's basically cosplaying as a MAHA champion.'
Means became a key influence in the MAHA movement last year along with her brother Calley Means, who works as an adviser to Kennedy in Department of Health and Human Services.
They co-wrote the book 'Good Energy: The Surprising Connection Between Metabolism and Limitless Health' about the connection between metabolism and personal health, and they promoted their ideas across conservative media, including a hit episode of Tucker Carlson's podcast.
The blowback to her nomination reflects the broader tensions within the MAHA movement, as different factions vie for influence in the Trump administration. The surgeon general serves as the public health face of the administration and wields a powerful bully pulpit, but has little actual authority.
Richard Carpiano, a professor of public policy at the University of California, Riverside, researches social factors affecting vaccine uptake and the anti-vaccine movement. He said Casey Means seems to have failed the purity test among some Kennedy supporters, but that public infighting also reflects the realities and limits MAHA.
'This is really kind of showing or pointing to questions of, you know, to what degree is it really like a movement or is it really just this kind of like brand that that Kennedy is really just trying to push,' Carpiano said.
MAGA influencer Laura Loomer in a series of posts on X accused the president's advisers of poorly vetting the new nominee for surgeon general.
She called Means a 'total crack pot' and 'Marxist tree hugger,' in the post, pointing to various alternative practices Means has written about, including communicating with spirit mediums and using hallucinogenic mushrooms as medicine.
Kennedy's former running mate, Nicole Shanahan, has also criticized Means's nomination, writing in a post on X that she was told neither of the Means siblings would work at department if she supported Kennedy.
'With regard to these siblings, there is something very artificial and aggressive about them, almost like they were bred and raised by Manchurian assets,' she wrote, adding that she suspected Kennedy was being controlled.
Kennedy has vehemently defended Means's nomination.
'The absurd attacks on Casey Means reveal just how far off course our healthcare conversations have veered, and how badly entrenched interests–including Big Food and its industry-funded social media gurus–are terrified of change,' he wrote Thursday on X.
Calley Means on Friday shot back at Loomer, writing on X, 'Just received information that Laura Loomer is taking money from industry to scuttle President Trump's agenda. @LauraLoomer if that's incorrect, sue me and let's do discovery.'
Loomer responded by calling him a 'PR spin master' and accused him of being 'threatened' by her 'access to President Trump.'
Casey Means left a five-year residency program at the Oregon Health & Science University after 4 1/2 years due to anxiety and feeling she wanted to do something different, the Los Angeles Times reported.
She has since cultivated a large following online and is the co-founder of Levels, a health technology company that focuses on tracking health information through devices like continuous glucose monitors.
Those who've worked with Means describe her as someone with a genuine concern for public health, particularly when it comes to young people.
Soh Kim, executive director of the Stanford Center for Innovation and Design Research, worked alongside Means at Stanford University, teaching a food, design and technology course.
'She is very rare in terms of, like, her rigorous medical knowledge but also, she is somebody who can, you know, talk to anyone in the class with their level,' Kim said.
But others questioned her qualifications for such a high-profile public health role. Former U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams noted, shortly after Means was nominated, that the surgeon general position has historically been required to be held be a licensed physician.
'As the Senate is considering confirmation, it is important that historical precedent, the ability to effectively lead the USPHS, and the law, are all taken into consideration,' he wrote, referring to the U.S. Public Health Service, which the surgeon general oversees.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Food and Drug Administration staff cuts may hinder US biomedical innovation
President Trump has rightly emphasized restoring America's economic and strategic independence — from reshoring pharmaceutical production to cutting regulatory red tape. But not all reforms are created equal. Recent restructuring efforts at the Food and Drug Administration may have been well-intentioned, but they risk undermining the very innovation and domestic capacity the president seeks to promote. In March, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced a sweeping reorganization of the agency, which in part included the elimination of 3,500 full-time employees at the Food and Drug Administration — many of them senior scientific staff and experienced regulators who served as institutional pillars across drug review divisions. While we all support government efficiency and the secretary's efforts to create a gold-standard regulatory agency, the loss of this institutional memory risks hobbling the expedited pathways that small biotech firms rely on to deliver therapies for rare and life-threatening diseases. Unfortunately, the impact of these cuts is not theoretical. The Wall Street Journal has reported that some biotech firms have had to delay or cancel clinical trials due to lack of timely Food and Drug Administration guidance. One California biotech firm facing unpredictable delays has even turned to European regulators to move forward with a clinical trial — effectively offshoring American capital, investment and jobs. Others have reported receiving conflicting and confusing feedback from inexperienced FDA staff or no response at all on time-sensitive requests. But such issues don't just affect companies; they hurt patients, too. Innovation in gene therapies, cancer immunotherapies, and treatments for rare diseases depend on regulatory clarity and speed. Without senior staff to help clarify agency positions, decisions are either delayed or driven by less-experienced personnel unfamiliar with long-standing scientific standards. It's no surprise then that over 200 biotech CEOs, patient advocates and investors — many of them strong supporters of FDA modernization — have expressed their concerns in a letter to Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy (R-La.). As a former member of Congress who sat on the Appropriations subcommittee overseeing the FDA, I have long supported targeted reforms to make the agency more nimble and responsive. But there is a fine line between streamlining operations and cutting the institutional capacity necessary to do the job. Removing experienced drug reviewers before an adequate backup plan can be put into place not only jeopardizes U.S. safety standards but also undermines our competitive edge. This matter is not merely a domestic problem; it's a global race. Since 2014, the number of biomedical drugs under development in China has grown twelvefold. Meanwhile, innovation in the U.S. has remained relatively flat. If trends continue, China could match or surpass the U.S. in biomedical innovation within the decade. We have seen this movie before — in semiconductors, in telecommunications, in clean energy. We cannot afford to let biotech go the same way. The Trump administration's tariff policy was designed to bring pharmaceutical manufacturing back to U.S. shores. But how can we expect capital to stay in the U.S. if our regulatory infrastructure cannot deliver? Delays and unpredictability at the FDA don't just slow down science — they push investors to look elsewhere. Even the user fee system — critical to funding timely drug reviews and a source of government revenue — has been impacted by the reduction in force. Staff who oversaw the reauthorization of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act have been laid off, raising questions about whether the agency will even be able to continue to collect user fees and whether these government cuts will actually end up costing taxpayers in the long run. Of course, Kennedy has long been a vocal advocate for health reform. His Make America Healthy Again agenda's focus on combatting chronic diseases and enhancing nutritional standards deserves attention. His focus for such reform is where his background and passion can lead to meaningful improvements. But when it comes to regulating complex biologics and therapeutics, we must be careful about taking actions that could inadvertently stymie scientific progress. President Trump's vision for American self-reliance will only succeed if it's built on a foundation of regulatory competence and stability. Swift actions should therefore be taken to restore the FDA's core functions, rehire critical staff and unfreeze the hiring of roles essential to America's leadership in biomedical science. The stakes — for patients, for innovation and for national security — are simply too high to ignore. John T. Doolittle is a former member of Congress who served on the Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, and Related Agencies subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations.
Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. considers scrapping religious exemptions for vaccinations
Advertisement In Massachusetts, parents can write a letter stating that a vaccine conflicts with their 'sincerely held religious belief' in order to exempt their children from vaccination requirements needed to enroll in public schools. State Rep. Andy Vargas and State Sen. Edward Kennedy both Advocates who oppose the exemptions say that religious exceptions are being misused by parents who are hesitant about vaccinating their children. Advertisement 'It's definitely a general pattern of people abusing the exemption, especially since But parents across the state came to Beacon Hill to testify in support of religious exemptions at a hearing of the Legislature's Joint Committee on Public Health. They said exemptions were essential to their first amendment right to practice their religion and to honor the concept of informed consent. 'I'm curious why diversity, equity and inclusion is not being applied to those with sincerely held religious beliefs,' Lisa Ottaviano said while testifying at the hearing. Some speakers at the hearing said they were uncomfortable with the components of certain vaccines. 'We should not be forced into violating our moral conscience by injecting products developed from aborted fetuses such as the MMR, the varicella vaccines,' said Nicholas Kottenstette, a Catholic father of four from Sterling, Massachusetts. Vaccines don't contain fetal cells, Others testifying against the bill said they wanted to protect religious exemptions because they felt that accountability measures for vaccine manufacturers were insufficient. 'I started meeting more people whose children had reactions to vaccines that were adverse, so I started doing my own research and learnt a lot of concerning things like how pharmaceutical companies have legal protection against being sued,' Maureen Trettel, a grandmother from Milford said. Advertisement Similar bills have been filed in previous sessions, so the debate over religious exemptions for vaccines in Massachusetts has been going on since at least 2019, well before the COVID-19 pandemic that made vaccines a polarizing issue. The elevation of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vaccine skeptic, to U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services has drawn even more interest to the issue. Last week, Kennedy Logan Beyer, an aspiring pediatrician pursuing an MD/PhD degree in public health at Harvard, spoke in favor of eliminating religious exemptions. While volunteering at a Special Olympics event, Beyer spoke to a parent who told her that she was worried that vaccines caused autism. The mother told Beyer that she was planning to apply for a religious exemption because she was unsure about vaccinating her children. 'She told me that her family 'didn't really go to church' but you don't have to prove anything to get the exemption,' Beyer said. Beyer said that this incident made her concerned about growing vaccine hesitancy and inspired her to testify. 'At the hearing, so many parents said they just want to do what's best for their children … I love that instinct,' Beyer said, 'But I know that passing policies that help facilitate more kids getting vaccinated is really what can keep children safe.' Advertisement Harrison, mother of cancer-survivor Miranda, also understands the instinct of parents on the other side of the issue, even if she disagrees with them. In addition to Miranda, Harrison has twin six-year old boys who both have autism. 'I can know the grief and shock that parents experience when they find out their kid has autism. I get it,' Harrison said. 'But vaccines are not to blame ... autism is a result of Around 16,000 children in Massachusetts are unvaccinated without claiming an exemption — a group that the state describes as 'noncompliant students' in its documents. Many parents in opposition to the bills questioned why the bills were trained just on the 2,000 students who did have religious exemptions. 'I'm curious why the Legislature is targeting the small percentage of children with religious exemptions and ignoring the huge gap population,' said Ottaviano testifying at the hearing. Advocates for the bills said the new provisions that mandate that all schools must report vaccination numbers to the state's department of public health would address these noncompliant students as well. 'That's what the data reporting is about, we want to make sure that schools have accurate records,' Blair of Massachusetts Families for Vaccines said. 'If there is a gap … they should reach out to those students to find out why the records are not on file.' Speakers in favor of the bills were focused on eliminating religious exemptions in order to protect children who cannot be vaccinated due to medical reasons like allergies or problems with their immune systems. 'It's actually those people … that we're really doing this for, because they're the ones who depend on herd immunity,' Blair said. Advertisement Angela Mathew can be reached at
Miami Herald
6 hours ago
- Miami Herald
What Trump's Strikes on Iran Mean for Gas Prices As Oil Costs Surge
Amid the conflict between Israel and Iran, oil prices have been surging, and after President Donald Trump announced on Saturday the U.S. would be joining the attack on Iran's nuclear sites, concern has been raised over what this means for gas prices in America. The U.S. dropped bombs on Iran's three main nuclear sites on Saturday night—Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan—escalating fears of an expansion of the Middle Eastern conflict that could throw the oil market into turmoil. With much of the West already seeing spikes in costs, further increases could be looming as the conflict continues. After the U.S. attack, the Iran's reaction will reveal whether the conflict could develop into a major regional or even international conflict. Iran may retaliate against U.S. forces in the region, cut off a global oil supply route or try to accelerate its nuclear program. Although, Trump has warned of further military action if Tehran does not now decide to make peace. In the past week, Brent Crude oil stocks have already jumped 11 percent since Israel attacked Iran and is expected to continue rising on Monday, according to Emirati newspaper Gulf News, although prices have been fluctuating. The oil market had stabilized on Friday, according to Reuters, after the U.S. imposed new Iran-related sanctions, which fueled hopes that a negotiated agreement could be made between the two countries. That relief in the market was only temporary as after Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil chokepoint, in response to the U.S. strikes. Fears that Iran could attack U.S. oil infrastructure in the region, and levy its power over the Straits of Hormuz could "combine to make prices and speculation rise about the security and dependability of supply," Greg Kennedy, director of the Economic Conflict and Competition Research Group at King's College London told Newsweek. "Lack of clarity of how long this condition will last will also lead to hoarding or preemptive purchasing by other nations, so there are competition supply fears that will drive up prices," he added. Reflecting on the knock-on effect this would have on U.S. gas prices, Kennedy said that in the long term, the conflict "will most certainly see energy prices go up at the pumps." "This is not an act that just stays in the Gulf region, it has wider global strategic ripples," he said. Kennedy said that higher oil prices could also mean that Russia is able to gain more money—oil from the Urals region has already increased by 26 percent in the past month. "This is making war in Ukraine last longer now as well as it gives [President Vladimir] Putin both political and economic ammunition to continue his war efforts and avoid the need for peace talks." Greg Kennedy, director of the Economic Conflict and Competition Research Group at King's College London told Newsweek: "The overall impact of actions that make the world look even less safe than it was previously was is always a cost to the civilian sector and society as a whole." As the conflict, and its repercussions, continue to unfold in the next few days, it will become more clear how significant the prices hikes will be. Related Articles Donald Trump Warns Iran Against 'Any Retaliation' After US Strikes: Live UpdatesExclusive: Hezbollah Says It Won't Join Fight After US Attacks IranTrump Warns Iran To Make Peace or Face Further StrikesAOC Says Trump's Iran Strikes 'Clearly Grounds for Impeachment' 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
