The fight over autism and vaccines has surged back to the center of US health policy, and advocates say the people driving it now hold the government’s highest health offices.

A recently released report accuses top Trump administration health officials, including Health and Human Services secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, of fueling a dangerous wave of misinformation that has eroded public trust. According to the report, officials have spent the past year amplifying disputed claims around vaccines and autism while reopening debates that public health researchers say evidence has already settled. The report argues that the damage now reaches beyond a single issue and into the public’s confidence in the country’s health institutions.

Advocates say the crisis no longer centers only on bad information online; it now comes from the top of the federal health system.

The report points to several flashpoints. Experts cited in coverage say administration officials have explored claims linking autism to acetaminophen use during pregnancy despite growing evidence of no link. The report also raises alarm over the replacement of all members of the federal autism committee with advisers whose records, reports indicate, include anti-vaccine views and pseudoscientific positions. For critics, that shift signals not just a messaging problem but a structural change in who shapes federal health advice.

Key Facts

  • A new report accuses Trump administration health officials of worsening misinformation on autism and vaccines.
  • Robert F Kennedy Jr is among the officials named by advocates calling for congressional oversight.
  • Critics say officials promoted disputed theories, including claims about acetaminophen use during pregnancy.
  • The federal autism committee was reportedly replaced with advisers tied to anti-vaccine and pseudoscientific views.

The response from autism advocates has grown sharper. The report calls for Congress to hold oversight hearings and, in some cases, consider impeachment of officials it says have abused public authority. That demand underscores how far this dispute has escalated: critics no longer describe the issue as a fringe information war but as a federal accountability test. At stake, they argue, is whether Americans can trust health guidance during moments when clarity matters most.

What comes next will likely unfold on two tracks: political scrutiny in Washington and public confusion across the country. If lawmakers pursue hearings, the administration’s handling of autism policy, vaccine messaging, and scientific advisory bodies could face far more intense examination. That matters because trust, once broken, does not return quickly—and in public health, the cost of that collapse can ripple far beyond one administration.