Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his allies of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement have no shortage of targets – products, policies, foods and drinks that they see as deteriorating the health of the nation. Alcohol seems to have so far staved off their outrage.
Kennedy, if confirmed as health secretary, would be given power over a wide range of issues. Beyond his direct duties, he would ensure a platform to shape the public debate on health care and, through the new President Trump, motivate Congress to act. Could it inspire a new temperance movement and change alcohol’s status as politically untouchable?
“During the campaign, RFK and President Trump talked about the need to stop recommending harmful chemicals and stop subsidizing them. Phase 1 of MAHA is full transparency about what makes us sick in the eyes of the American people and lawmakers can make informed decisions,” Calley Means, a Kennedy adviser, told STAT when asked if the Alcohol could be part of the movement.
In many ways, alcoholic beverages share commonalities with the foods Kennedy wants to crack down on, said Nicholas Reville, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Addiction Science, Policy and Research. Alcohol and ultra-processed foods can be addictive, buzzing the brain’s pleasure circuits and causing intense cravings in some people. Many forms of alcohol are even considered ultra-processed foods, because they contain additives, preservatives and added sugars – but often no need to list them on the labels.
Both are also linked to a variety of common health problems, although the evidence for alcohol’s risks is clearer than that. ultra-processed foods. Excessive alcohol consumption — defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as more than four drinks per session (five for men) or more than eight drinks per week (15 for men) — can cause harm. through the body. Excessive alcohol consumption has been linked to an increased risk of heart disease, liver disease, stroke, high blood pressure and half a dozen types of cancer.
In recent weeks, two reports have drawn attention to the potential harms of alcohol, even at “moderate” levels of consumption: one drink per day for women (two for men). Outgoing U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued an advisory this month calling for stronger warning labels on alcohol containers, including the mention of the alcohol-cancer link. In December, a scientific report which will be used to shape the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans documented an association between moderate alcohol consumption and increased risk of breast cancer. (This same report also found that moderate alcohol consumption was associated with a lower risk of death from any reason, although it was unclear whether alcohol alone was the reducing factor the risk.)
And although there is an ongoing public debate about whether light to moderate alcohol consumption is dangerous, researchers agree that there are undeniable risks associated with more intense levels of drinking. At least 178,000 deaths each year are attributable to excessive alcohol consumption, CDC data suggests.
Although Kennedy himself has not spoken out in recent months about alcohol as a factor in chronic illness and death, others in his circle have. Marty Makary, Trump’s choice to lead the Food and Drug Administration and gastrointestinal surgeon, called alcohol a “blind spot” in the broader public health debate. “More people die from alcohol abuse than from opioids and fentanyl. I don’t think we talk enough about the potential for abuse,” he said in October on “The Prof G Pod” with author Scott Galloway.
Casey Means, co-founder of health technology company Levels and (with her brother Calley) a distinguished member of MAHA from its beginnings, has written at length about stopping alcohol consumption in 2024. “I want to reduce my own risk of cancer and, surprisingly, alcohol is the third modifiable risk factor for cancer. » she wrote on her blog. Means’ mother died of cancer in 2021.
Kennedy is in long-term recovery from drugs and alcohol and said he attends nine AA meetings a week. He also took mixed positions completed drug treatment in the past. Trump has previously said he doesn’t drink because his brother Fred died in his early 40s after developing an alcohol use disorder. “He told me: “Don’t drink. Don’t drink. He was much older and I listened to him. Trump said in 2018.
Still, alcohol is big business. Trump owns a winery and has appeared at events sponsored by alcohol companies. He also owned a brand of vodka. The U.S. alcohol industry is an economic mega-engine, encompassing producers of beer, wine, spirits and mixed drinks, as well as distributors, liquor stores, bars and restaurants and other retail outlets across the country. detail. It is estimated to support millions of jobs and generate tens of billions in tax revenue each year.
As a result, alcohol… like food – has the backing of powerful corporations. The beer, wine and spirits industries gave millions to lawmakers of both parties in the last election cycle. Congress appeared to defend its interests, even investigating a federal panel study the harmful health effects of alcohol for dietary guidelines. (Two groups, one from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, and the other led by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, were charged with combing through the scientific literature on the risks of alcohol.)
Dozens of lawmakers, led by Health Care and Financial Services Subcommittee Chairwoman Lisa McClain (R-Mich.), alleged that the SAMHSA study was poorly done and included researchers with bias against alcohol. The panel’s report is expected later this month.
“The Biden administration has repeatedly ignored Congress’ mandate and assumed inappropriate authority over the study on the health effects of alcohol consumption. It is imperative that these guidelines, which impact the health of Americans, be based solely on scientific research and not an agenda pushed by unelected bureaucrats,” McClain told STAT in a statement.
Advocates have criticized lawmakers for intruding on the scientific process. Some also have to doubt the ethics of the NASEM panel, since it originally included researchers linked to the alcohol industry. These types of conflicts of interest are common in alcohol research. George Koob, longtime director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, has been criticized as too comfortable with the industry. A email analysis between 2013 and 2020 suggests that dozens of other agency staff and leaders interacted with alcohol representatives, informing them of policy developments and sometimes criticizing public health research. (Koob said he has since stepped away from the industry.)
Kennedy has made a career out of exposing government corruption — mostly related to environmental pollution — and his MAHA platform is committed to eliminating corporate influence in Washington. He could set his sights on alcohol research and policy. However, Trump’s love of deregulation and big business could win out. In 2017, Trump reduces federal taxes on alcohol, and Congress later made these reductions permanent. Its pro-free market supporters are said to be angered by government regulations that interfere with business.
“Since Prohibition was repealed, they have intervened in the system and ultimately created a system of state control that was probably far too expensive. We could probably get better health outcomes with a lighter touch,” said Michael LaFaive, senior director of fiscal policy at the free-market think tank Mackinac. Trump could also adopt recent Treasury Department recommendations to increase competition in the alcohol sector — a report the Biden administration has not acted on — and further lower prices for consumers, LaFaive said.
The wild card is MAHA himself and his ability to bring previously discordant ideas together. under the same banner. Attitudes about alcohol aren’t necessarily partisan, said Jason Taylor, an economic historian at Central Michigan University. “I can’t imagine an issue like this sticking to party lines today,” he said. Both parties have a wing that would oppose any attempt to combat alcohol as an attack on people’s freedoms, and both have a wing that would favor such policies, he said.
Some reforms, such as tying taxes to alcohol content (rather than liquid volume) and improve labelingcould gain bipartisan support if framed as health-focused measures. But even implementing them would be a challenge because of alcohol’s unique place in the culture. That would likely require a public pressure campaign and strong health advocacy, similar to that surrounding anti-smoking laws, Reville said. “With MAHA, it’s very possible that we will have warning labels on addictive foods before we have warning labels on addictive substances.”
In this way, perhaps only something like MAHA, which subverts ideology, could transform alcohol from a “nanny state” issue into a nonpartisan effort to improve the health of the nation.
Lev Facher contributed reporting.
STAT’s coverage of chronic health conditions is supported by a grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies. OUR financial support are not involved in any decisions regarding our journalism.