Just as American families prepared for another school year, the Trump administration unveiled a sweeping new health policy for children, but critics say it misses the mark on some of the most urgent threats facing the nation’s youth. On September 9, 2025, the administration published the much-anticipated “Make Our Children Healthy Again” (MAHA) strategy report, followed a day later by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s own 20-page plan. The documents promise a renewed federal focus on soil health, fluoride, women’s fertility, and vaping, but notably, they make no mention of climate change—a glaring omission, according to many scientists and public health advocates.
For Kennedy, who spent nearly three decades as an environmental lawyer and was once named one of Time Magazine’s “Heroes for the Planet,” the absence of climate change in his agenda is especially striking. During his Senate confirmation hearings earlier this year, Kennedy assured lawmakers, “I believe climate change is existential, my job is to make Americans healthy, again.” Yet, just two days after his confirmation, he oversaw the elimination of key climate and health programs at the National Institutes of Health, including the Climate Change and Health Initiative, the Climate Change and Health Research Coordinating Center, and the Climate and Health Scholars Program. Their websites have since vanished, and the Supreme Court last month upheld the Trump administration’s cuts of more than $2 billion in NIH research grants.
The MAHA plan’s silence on climate change comes at a time when the United Nations has called it “the single biggest health threat facing humanity.” According to a 2022 study cited by The New Yorker, nearly 60% of all known infectious diseases have been aggravated by climate change. Camilo Mora, a professor at the University of Hawai’i, explained that “the understanding that climate change has a huge impact on living systems is very well accepted.” His research details how warming temperatures are driving bats closer to humans, increasing the risk of Hendra virus exposure in children, while flooding events make it easier for snails to transmit water-borne parasitic diseases. There was even a case in Russia where a 12-year-old boy contracted Anthrax from a thawed reindeer carcass, previously frozen in permafrost.
“It’s hard for me as a scientist to understand what could be the reason for them to do something that is going to be so damaging to so many people,” Mora told The New Yorker, lamenting the administration’s narrowed research focus. Joshua Rosenthal, an environmental health scientist who worked at NIH and co-chaired the now-eliminated NIH Steering Committee on Climate Change and Health, echoed these concerns. “There are substantial health burdens associated with the distribution of toxins after flooding, after wildfires, after many extreme weather events, and we know that extreme temperatures make many people more biologically susceptible to toxins, especially the elderly or others who have previous health conditions,” Rosenthal said.
Despite these warnings, the MAHA strategy report spends considerable energy on toxins like those in fluoridated water and artificial food dyes—issues that, while not without merit, pale in comparison to the systemic threats posed by environmental degradation and climate change. Earlier this year, Kennedy announced plans to phase out eight petroleum-based food dyes, prompting major brands to voluntarily remove them by 2028. Yet, the MAHA movement’s focus on such issues, while ignoring the broader consequences of petroleum drilling and air pollution, has drawn sharp criticism. As Rosenthal put it, “What makes the MAHA movement distinct is not the topics it chooses to care about, but those it does not.”
Beyond environmental concerns, the Trump administration’s approach to child health has been marked by deep cuts to research and prevention programs. According to the Center for American Progress, the administration has gutted institutions responsible for children’s health research, firing top experts and slashing funding at the NIH, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The fiscal year 2026 budget request proposes cutting $320 million (35%) from NIH’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, $18 billion (38%) from NIH overall, $5 billion (54%) from the CDC, and $5 billion (54%) from the EPA. The administration has also moved to lift environmental protections that limit children’s exposure to chemicals, and Congress’ House Interior and Environment Appropriations Bill creates broad product liability protections for pesticide and chemical manufacturers while terminating risk assessments for PFAS, or “forever chemicals.”
For families relying on public health programs, the outlook is grim. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), passed under President Trump, will cut Medicaid by about $900 billion over a decade, reducing access to health care and early intervention services for children. The MAHA report’s recommendation that Medicaid providers offer nutrition coaching and fitness measurement rings hollow for Medicaid-dependent families facing drastic cuts. Removing artificial ingredients from food offers little comfort to children who cannot access food at all.
Perhaps most controversially, the MAHA report sows doubt about proven health strategies, especially vaccines. Despite overwhelming evidence that routine childhood vaccination has saved millions of lives, the report calls for new studies on vaccine safety and efficacy and even casts doubt on the safety of water fluoridation, ignoring decades of research showing its effectiveness in reducing tooth decay. Secretary Kennedy has reportedly threatened to fire all members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, potentially jeopardizing access to more than 100 preventive health care services, including screenings for chronic diseases and birth defects, as well as annual well-child visits. The administration’s weakening of clean air protections is projected to cause more than 10,000 preventable asthma attacks daily among children, a leading chronic condition that can cause lifelong harm.
The administration’s actions have disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, including LGBTQI+, disabled, Black, and Native American youth, who already face significant health disparities and are now being targeted by executive orders aimed at eliminating diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. The MAHA strategy report also fails to mention any plans to address gun violence—the leading cause of death among American children and adolescents. Federal funding for gun violence prevention programs has been cut by more than half, and the FY 2026 budget request eliminates all funding for firearm injury and mortality prevention research grants.
Public sentiment, however, appears out of step with the administration’s policies. Nearly 50% of Americans believe people are currently being hurt by global warming in the U.S., and 69% think large businesses and corporations are not doing enough to reduce climate change’s effects. Globally, 56% of respondents in a United Nations Development Programme survey said they think about climate change daily or weekly, and 78% want more protections for those at risk from extreme weather. Millennials and Gen Z, now the largest voting block, are more likely than previous generations to believe in climate change and demand action.
Meanwhile, the administration’s efforts to hinder clean energy development have also come under fire. At least six agencies recently coordinated plans to freeze funds and add bureaucratic hurdles to offshore wind projects, while legal battles rage over blocked developments in Rhode Island and Virginia. Despite these setbacks, some Republican lawmakers have voiced support for offshore wind, highlighting the growing complexity—and political realignment—around environmental and health policy.
As the impacts of climate change on public health become increasingly impossible to ignore, scientists and advocates warn that the administration’s narrow focus and deep budget cuts risk squandering a critical opportunity to protect America’s children. The MAHA report, critics argue, distracts from the real drivers of childhood disease and avoidable death, offering incremental or ineffective solutions while undermining the very institutions and strategies that have historically kept children healthy.
In the end, the fate of America’s children may hinge not just on what federal reports say, but on whether policymakers are willing to confront the full scope of threats to their health—and act boldly to protect them.
