Jeffrey A. Singer
A new survey from the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania finds that Americans make a clear distinction between career scientists and the political leaders running federal health agencies. While roughly two-thirds of respondents express confidence in agency scientists, far fewer trust the agencies’ political leadership.
The survey also shows that trust in major federal health agencies has declined, dropping from roughly three-quarters of Americans in 2024 to about six in ten in 2026. Americans report greater confidence in professional and independent medical organizations—about 77 percent trust the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and 82 percent trust the American Heart Association. They place the greatest trust of all in their own clinicians, with roughly 86 percent saying they trust their personal doctor for health information. The broader takeaway is that Americans aren’t rejecting medical expertise: They simply trust their own doctors and professional medical societies more than federal public health agencies, whose credibility has eroded in recent years.
This change in public attitudes is happening as professional medical societies and state and local public health agencies are rebelling against the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) revised immunization recommendations and developing alternative ones.
Recall that, last January, the AAP released its 2026 childhood immunization schedule, which is unchanged from last year. That continuity contrasts sharply with the revised schedule issued earlier this month by the CDC.
The AAP strongly opposes the CDC’s changes. And it is not alone. Several professional medical and public health organizations, including the American College of Physicians, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the American Public Health Association, and the Massachusetts Public Health Alliance, have rejected the revised CDC guidance. At least 20 state health departments and several counties have also announced that they will continue following the AAP schedule rather than the CDC’s.
Similarly, many prominent former public health officials, medical professionals, and patient advocacy groups are critical of surgeon general nominee Casey Means’ positions on various public and personal health issues.
I have previously written that the current “rebellion” of medical and public health societies against federal public agencies and their leaders is not only understandable but also beneficial in the long term:
As Terence Kealey, Bautista Vivanco, and I wrote on a tangentially related matter, “There is no one right answer, but when the federal government makes recommendations, health care providers and patients often treat them as authoritative.”
The CDC didn’t originally serve as a central command for American life. Founded in 1946—initially called the Communicable Disease Center—it had a simple, practical goal: assist states and localities in fighting serious infectious diseases such as malaria, tuberculosis, and smallpox. Its role was to conduct research, share expertise, and support local health departments, rather than micromanage personal health decisions.…
Public health is inherently local. Communities vary in density, demographics, and risk factors, and no single federal approach can capture that diversity.
The CDC would function better—and stay more true to its purpose—if it returned to its original goal: supporting and coordinating with state and local health agencies and leaving personal medical decisions to patients and their doctors.
Unfortunately, some states are taking steps to maintain federal dominance over public and personal health decisions. A coalition of 15 states is suing Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and the CDC, seeking to overturn the agency’s recent vaccine schedule recommendations and revert to the previous standards. This suggests that many policymakers still favor a federally sanctioned “one right answer.”
But in medicine, there is rarely a single right answer. Public health functions best when it is decentralized, relies on professional judgment, and adapts to local conditions—uncontrolled by a single federal voice.
Rather than trying to restore federal public health agencies to their previous policy positions, policymakers and health professionals should seize the opportunity that this moment presents. The current rebellion against federal authority should prompt a broader rethink of the federal role in public health.
National agencies should return to their original mission: conducting surveillance, collecting and sharing data, and supporting state and local health departments—not directing personal health decisions. Public health decisions should rest with states and communities, while personal medical decisions belong to patients in consultation with their clinicians. That shift should also include eliminating the Office of the Surgeon General and the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps as well as transferring any legitimate public health functions they perform to agencies better suited to carry them out.
If the Annenberg survey shows anything, it is that Americans already trust their doctors and professional medical societies more than federal health bureaucracies—and public policy should reflect that reality.