RFK Jr. Busted: Health Report Riddled With Made-Up Research

RFK Jr. during his hearing to be Secretary of Health and Human Services, January, 2025. Photo courtesy of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Public domain.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s highly publicized “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) report - promoted as a science-backed solution to the chronic illness crisis - is now under fire for citing multiple studies that apparently never existed. According to an investigation by Notus and reporting from The Guardian and BBC, at least seven studies cited in the report are unverifiable, raising serious questions about the report’s credibility and its role in shaping public health policy.

A 73-Page Report With Phantom Footnotes

The MAHA report, commissioned under the Trump administration and released by Kennedy’s Department of Health and Human Services, was touted as a “gold-standard” investigation into the root causes of chronic disease in children, according to The Guardian. Kennedy claimed it was backed by more than 500 scientific citations and intended to provide an evidence-based foundation for sweeping reforms.

But upon closer examination, several of the cited studies appear to be completely fabricated. Notus discovered that two of the supposed studies on ADHD medication advertising do not exist in the journals where they’re claimed to be published. One citation that allegedly involved researcher Robert L. Findling could not be verified by Virginia Commonwealth University, where Findling is affiliated. According to The Guardian, another citation led only to the MAHA report itself when searched online.

A separate citation involving asthma overprescription, which named pediatric specialist Harold J. Farber as an author, was also debunked. Farber confirmed he had never written such a paper or collaborated with the listed co-authors.

Some Scientists Say: ‘Totally Fabricated’

Academics and researchers named in the report were quick to dispute their alleged involvement. According to the BBC, Guohua Li, a professor at Columbia University, said that a study he was supposedly involved in was “totally fabricated.” He added that he didn’t even recognize the name of the listed co-author. Noah Kreski, another Columbia researcher listed in the same citation, also said he had no involvement, saying it “doesn’t appear to be a study that exists at all.”

Epidemiologist Katherine Keyes also disputed her involvement, telling Reuters that she was incorrectly listed as an author. “It does make me concerned given that citation practices are an important part of conducting and reporting rigorous science,” she said, according to the BBC.

One study allegedly cited to prove the effectiveness of talk therapy over psychiatric drugs was also misrepresented. Statistician Joanne McKenzie told Notus that her paper didn’t even include psychotherapy, contrary to what the report claimed.

Sleep researcher Mariana G. Figueiro also came forward to say her study had been cited inaccurately. The report stated it involved children, when in fact the research was focused on college students, and even named the wrong journal.

What the Government Is Saying - and Not Saying

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt tried to downplay the controversy, calling the missteps “formatting issues” and promising updates. She insisted the citation errors do “not negate the substance of the report,” according to the BBC.

The Department of Health and Human Services has not provided an official statement to The Guardian as of the report’s publication. Still, the Democratic National Committee criticized Kennedy’s agency for “justifying its policy priorities with sources that do not exist” and using citations that are “rife with errors, from broken links to misstated conclusions,” the BBC reported.

RFK’s War on Medical Publishing

The controversy comes on the heels of Kennedy’s public criticism of top-tier medical journals. Earlier this week, he accused leading publications like The Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine, and JAMA of being “corrupt” and controlled by pharmaceutical companies, according to the Guardian. He proposed creating government-run journals instead - a move that some see as undermining scientific independence.

Since taking office in February, Kennedy has implemented sweeping changes to the Department of Health and Human Services, including mass layoffs and plans to require placebo-controlled trials for all new vaccines. With a follow-up report titled “Make Our Children Healthy Again Strategy” expected in August, critics are urging greater scrutiny of how this administration handles scientific integrity.

Where Experts Find Common Ground

Despite the errors and criticism, some experts say elements of the MAHA report reflect valid public health priorities. According to Medscape, a new University of Pennsylvania review highlights several proposals from MAHA that align with established science. These include efforts to reduce toxic chemicals in food, curb sugary drink subsidies, and expand access to nutrition services in healthcare.

“We may not agree with everything that the MAHA commission and [Kennedy] are putting forth,” said Alyssa Moran, ScD, MPH, director of policy and research strategy at the Penn Center for Food and Nutrition Policy, according to Medscape. “We’re kind of saying to the MAHA caucus, ‘Here’s your food policy roadmap.’”

The report also earned praise from some in public health circles. Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, director of the Food is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, said the Penn paper was “a very sensible report with a lot of recommendations that echo prior work,” according to Medscape. Additionally, Jerold Mande, MPH, former FDA official, called it “terrific,” noting that it provides a useful framework for refining the MAHA report’s more actionable ideas.

Trust, Truth, and the Future of Health Policy

The discovery of non-existent and mischaracterized studies in a federally commissioned report is not just a footnote - it raises deep concerns about the quality and motivations behind U.S. public health strategy. Still, the report’s more grounded proposals - particularly those around food safety and nutrition access - offer a starting point for productive debate.

As Kennedy pushes forward with bold, controversial policies, the scientific community and the public alike are left asking: if the evidence is shaky, what is the foundation for reform?

References: RFK Jr’s ‘Maha’ report found to contain citations to nonexistent studies | US government report cited non-existent sources, academics say | Exclusive: New Report Breaks Down Science Behind MAHA