I have mixed thoughts about giving RFK Jr dominion over national health policy. On one hand, it doesn't seem like it can get much worse. But taken to the extremes of RFK Jr's positions, I think it could.

There are three big sides to this battle.

One of the three big sides the corporatists, who have been in control of US policy for several generations. The corporatists, who include Big Agra, Big Pharma, the HMOs and big hospitals, are almost entirely comprised of money-obsessed, shamelessly lying crapweasels.

The second big side is academia, which has been in control of European health policy for several generations. Academia is one of the few groups in the known universe that's comprised of bigger whores and more shameless liars than the corporatists and, in the US, many of them have indeed sold out to the corporatists. Most of the rest pursue and uphold the lofty academic standard of ivory tower detachment from reality to the point of batshit (or bat virus) insanity. The key thing to remember about academics is that, factions aside, 99% of them endlessly screech “TRUST THE SCIENCE™!!!!!”

The third big side is the homeopaths, who largely define themselves as rejecting everything the corporatists say. In a sense, they're the conservatives of the health world, demanding absolute health freedom areas where they oppose the corporatists and absolute draconian Trust The Science™ regulation in areas where they agree with the anti-corporatist academics.

None of these sides are wrong 100% of the time, but they all have agendas that transcend their alleged devotion to personal and public health.

RFK Jr. aligns with the homeopaths.

By rejecting the corporatists, the homeopaths seem to get many things right by default, to the extent that we can cut through the endless river of bullshit that is health science. But not everything, though, as Steve Jobs found out the hard way trying to treat cancer with fruits and vegetables.

To pick one topic, food preservatives. The research suggesting that, for example, BHT is harmful is garbage. But even if it's correct, which is worse: a tiny fraction of a percentage risk from a chemical, or a tiny fraction of a percentage risk from food poisoning - because that's a risk that increases without preservatives. Even without that added risk, preservatives significantly lower the cost of food, make fresher food more readily available, and decrease the dependence on more processed preserved foods. There are tons of tradeoffs.

Plenty of other homeopath theories about radio waves and food additives are based on theories and research that make the Branch Covidians look sane and honest by comparison. The research quality is not just bad, it's actually worse. That is, when there even is research, as the homeopaths are generally obsessed with the anti-science concept of correlation equals causation.

Without getting into details, a lot of the anti-vax claims are straight-up retarded. That being said, they do make a few very strong arguments about the lack of thoroughness in testing and potential issues with the government demanding that we cram as many vaccines into children as we can. Mysteriously, vaccines are the one are of medicine where The Science™ tells us that minimal testing is fine, ongoing studies are not just a waste of money but actually dangerous, and that dosage doesn't really matter all that much. 10, 20, 500 vaccines on the schedule, sure, fine, whatever. This doesn't prove that any or all vaccines are bad, but a healthy dose of skepticism is warranted.

Now after shitting all over the homeopaths, I will confess that if someone put a gun to my head and told me to pick a team, I'd pick them. But it's not because they're great. It's because the other teams are so much worse. At the end of the day, though, the homeopaths are just another form of Trust The Science™, except on the topic of vaccines where they're shouting You Can't Trust The Science™.

RFK Jr chasing the corporatists and their bought-and-paid for US-style Trust The Science™ out of national health care policy is a good thing. But, for the most part, he's just replacing them with a more EU-style Trust The Science™ and much of the rest is all correlation equals causation.

Does this make us healthier? Probably. The current regime is deeply awful and even more deeply entrenched, But it won't make us healthiest, and it's important to apply just as much skepticism to his claims as you would the existing regime's. The best approach is to maximize the freedom of individuals to control their own health outcomes, and rejecting that notion is, sadly, the one thing that all three sides heartily agree on.