Why Should I Trust You?

On today’s episode, we’re joined by Dr. Francis Collins, the former head of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Collins has spent his career pushing the frontiers of science — from discovering genes linked to deadly diseases to leading the historic Human Genome Project. And during COVID, he helped steer the government’s public health response, including the rapid development of the COVID vaccine — work that still puts him in the hot seat with communities who feel science betrayed their trust.Now, as the Trump administration and the Make America Healthy Again movement tackle America’s chronic health crisis with a radically different approach, what does he make of what he’s seeing, from the sweeping shift in priorities to widespread cuts in research funding? Does he see common ground with the MAHA movement’s goals? And, after a lifetime devoted to advancing science and health, what does he believe is the best way to rebuild trust and make America healthier?Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonDr. Maggie BartlettDr.Mark AbdelmalekGuest:Dr. Francis Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health, author The Road to WisdomThanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

When COVID hit, public health leaders often said, “There was no playbook.” But was that really true?Decades earlier, during the AIDS crisis, America’s public health system went through a trial by fire—learning hard lessons about how to communicate amid uncertainty, adapt to evolving science, and work with communities instead of against them.Flash forward to COVID, and many Americans say they lost trust after experiencing what they saw as a top-down, dismissive approach from public health leaders. They say their questions and concerns about mitigation efforts and science were often met with rigid messaging, outright dismissal, and even censorship.In today’s episode, we sit down with Dr. Reed Tuckson, a public health leader and former Commissioner of Public Health for Washington, D.C., during the height of the AIDS epidemic. He reflects on what that era taught him—and what it might still teach us about rebuilding trust today.Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonMaggie BartlettDr. Mark Abdelmalek (off this week)Guest:Dr. Reed Tuckson, former Commissioner of Public Health in Washington DC; founder, Coalition for Trust in Health and ScienceThanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

Why is a little-known CDC advisory committee meeting today making big headlines?Because Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just fired every single member—replacing them with his own hand-picked team.The committee in question is ACIP, a group of independent experts that guides how vaccines are used by hundreds of millions of Americans. Kennedy called the shake-up a “clean sweep,” claiming the previous committee's work was just a rubber stamp for Big Pharma and couldn’t be trusted.Many in the medical and scientific community warn that this move could dismantle the nation’s vaccine system, erode public trust, and drive up costs.What should we trust? And can we trust that the health of Americans is not getting caught in the crossfire? Today, we speak with two of the fired ACIP members to hear their direct response to the accusations. Then, Dr. Michael Mina—physician, scientist, and critic of the firings—joins us to unpack the broader context of these sweeping changes to America’s vaccine policy, what concerns are real, and what might be overblown.Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonMaggie BartlettDr. Mark AbdelmalekGuests:Charlotte Moser, ex-ACIP, co-director, Vaccine Education CenterDr Jamie Loehr, ex-ACIP, family physicianDr Michael Mina; physician, immunologist; epidemiologistSources:Michael Mina:https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/11/opinion/rfk-vaccine-policy-changes.htmlThanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

In today’s episode, what do a group of MAHA, MAGA, and independent moms and dads of children with disabilities think about the changes Republicans in Congress are hashing out right now for Medicaid, as they push to pass President Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill”?If a healthier America is your top priority, this is a red-alert moment. A nonpartisan Congressional estimate finds that the House-passed Medicaid changes would lead to millions of Americans losing health insurance. And just this week, the Republican-controlled Senate released its own draft, proposing even bigger changes that would result in deeper cuts.With 71 million enrollees, Medicaid is the largest health insurance program in the country, a vital lifeline for both Red and Blue America. So what do these parents — who either depend on Medicaid now or expect to in the future — want Republican lawmakers and MAHA leaders to know about the realities of their daily lives? Is this what they voted for? And if not, what will they do about it?Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonMaggie Bartlett (off this week)Dr. Mark AbdelmalekGuests:Jacqueline Capriotti, health coalition leader, substack author Health Revolution USA, mother of two kids with CF, MAHA advocateJames Cummings, digital engagement strategist, father to children with rare diseasesSue Teitelbaum, mother of daughter with special needsNancy Fuller, MAHA Ohio grassroots, mother to son living with autismElizabeth Frost, MAHA grassroots leader OhioDr. Megan Ranney, dean of Yale School of Public Health; ER physicianDr. Craig Spencer, associate professor Brown University, ER physician, Doctors Without BordersDr. Reed Tuckson, founder of Coalition to Build Trust in Health and Science, physician. Resources:https://5calls.org/https://clairesplacefoundation.org/https://www.dol.gov/agencies/odep/initiatives/saw-rtw/retain/phase-oneFrom Jacqueline Capriotti:https://healthrevolutionusa.substack.com/p/when-trust-the-science-isnt-enough?r=5aqw38&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=trueThanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

Dr. Drew Weissman, a Nobel Prize-winning scientist and director at the University of Pennsylvania's Institute for RNA Innovation, discusses the transformative role of mRNA technology. He delves into the polarized public perception around mRNA vaccines, contrasting the views of supporters and critics. Weissman addresses safety concerns and the ethical dilemmas tied to pharmaceutical profit. The conversation extends to mRNA's potential in combating chronic diseases and the ongoing debates about public trust in medicine, underscoring the importance of transparency.

Paul Offit, an infectious disease pediatrician and co-inventor of the rotavirus vaccine, joins a dynamic panel including Ashwin Vasan, former NYC health commissioner, and MAHA advocates like Melinda Hicks, who express concerns over conventional medicine. They engage in a thought-provoking discussion about the COVID vaccine's legacy, tackling vaccine mistrust and the emotional toll of the pandemic. Topics of transparency, accountability, and the need for effective communication to rebuild trust in public health emerge as crucial elements for healthier communities.

We’ve heard it—and you’ve probably heard it too: critics of public health say the way health advice is delivered is a big part of why trust is plummeting. The critique goes like this: experts and institutions often take complicated, nuanced data and present it as all-knowing, black-and-white rules—“Vaccines are safe,” “Raw milk is bad,” “Fluoride in drinking water is essential.”But too often, the public hears little explanation, context, or nuance—rarely an acknowledgment of what isn’t known, in the rush to declare what is. And when every message feels equally urgent, it’s hard to know what really matters most.Is presenting complicated data with simple, unflinching certainty the best way to help people make healthy choices? In a busy world, does simplifying at the expense of nuance lead to better health—or to eroded trust? And how is public health’s mandate—to speak to the whole community, including large percentages of people who lack regular access to health professionals—different from the personalized advice of a one-on-one doctor’s visit?In 2025, with endless information and competing voices, how must public health communication evolve to meet the times?Today on Why Should I Trust You?, we’re joined by Emily Oster—economist, professor, health-data expert, best-selling parenting author, and founder of ParentData.org. We talk health, data, and how to communicate honestly about risk and benefit. Could a new approach to health guidance be the key to rebuilding trust? Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonMaggie BartlettDr. Mark AbdelmalekGuest:Emily Oster, author, economist, founder ParentData (www.parentdata.org)Books: Expecting Better; The Family Firm; Crib SheetResources:Emily Oster: There's a Better Way to Talk About Fluoride, Vaccines and Raw Milkhttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/13/opinion/vaccines-fluoride-raw-milk.htmlEmily Oster: Let's Declare a Pandemic Amnestyhttps://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/covid-response-forgiveness/671879/Thanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

Alison Singer, co-founder of the Autism Science Foundation, and Nancy Fuller, a dedicated mom navigating her son's autism, engage in a heartfelt dialogue. They explore the complexities of autism research, touching on the historical misconceptions and the vital role of parental advocacy. The discussion delves into the historical evolution of autism understanding, the emotional journey of families, and the contentious vaccine-autism debate. Ultimately, they emphasize the need for informed conversations and collaboration in the search for truth and understanding.

Today, we’re joined by CNN's Jake Tapper, who along with Axios' Alex Thompson, are authors of the new book Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again. Their reporting is sending shockwaves throughout Washington and beyond--its release landing the same week as the news of the former president’s aggressive cancer diagnosis. The result is a seismic reckoning with Biden’s decision to seek re-election despite visible signs of age-related decline. And Tapper and Thompson have been blasted over whether they did everything they could to hold the president and his team accountable. We ask: How much did the media know—and not report, including Tapper himself? Why did Biden, his top advisors, and Democratic leaders ignore the overwhelming concerns from the public about Biden’s frailty? And how did that denial deepen America’s distrust in its leaders, its institutions, and the press?Yes, this is a story about health, aging, and what we expect from our leaders—but at its core, it’s about truth and trust. It is the kind of hard truth about aging and vulnerability that we -- and our systems --  often resist confronting Hosts:Brinda AdhikariTom JohnsonMaggie BartlettDr. Mark AbdelmalekGuest:Jake Tapper, CNN, co-author, Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.Thanks for listening! If you like us, please leave a review, rate us, and please subscribe! Got questions? Comments? We'd love to hear from you! Email us at questions@whyshoulditrustyou.net

Join infectious disease pediatrician Paul Offit, grassroots organizer Elizabeth Frost, and ER doctor Craig Spencer in a riveting discussion on the sharp divides in public health today. They tackle the tension between vaccine autonomy and public health guidance, emphasizing the need for trust and collaboration. Hear insights on combating misinformation and the ethical challenges faced by scientists working with pharmaceutical companies. The personal stories shared reveal the emotional weight of health decisions, highlighting the urgency for clear communication in a polarized landscape.