Medical Schools Fill RFK Jr.’s Nutrition Prescription

But one healthy reform does not mean medical education has cured its deeper ailments.

Author’s Note: This article originally appeared in my weekly Top of Mind newsletter, which goes out to subscribers every Thursday. Sign up to receive it directly in your inbox.


For decades, American medical schools managed the remarkable feat of graduating physicians into one of the most overfed and metabolically battered societies in the developed world while devoting almost no instructional hours to nutrition. But RFK Jr. is giving these schools a checkup.

53 medical schools in 31 states have now signed on to expand their nutrition curriculum to 40 hours, with the American Medical Association and the Association of American Medical Colleges both backing the initiative. This support is striking given how readily many of these institutions dismiss RFK Jr. as a crank. The more important question, however, is why it took decades for medical schools to correct such an obvious omission.

The answer has something, if not everything, to do with where medical schools get much of their funding.

Pharmaceutical companies have historically provided roughly half of the funding for continuing medical education in the United States—a relationship long recognized as a serious conflict of interest and one that naturally produces a curriculum oriented toward the prescription pad rather than the produce aisle. As the National Library of Medicine has noted, preventive care remains underpracticed largely because providers are paid to treat disease rather than prevent it. One might accuse me of conspiracy-mongering for suggesting that funders shape what institutions teach, but when the 1990s Food Pyramid turned out to be agricultural policy dressed up as nutritional science, it settled the question of whether supposedly neutral guidelines might serve priorities other than public health.

The demand that medical schools teach nutrition is one part of RFK Jr.’s broader Make America Healthy Again agenda. Separately, he has also moved to overhaul federal dietary policy itself. The new Health and Human Services and USDA guidelines now invert the old pyramid entirely, prioritizing protein, healthy fats, and dairy while reducing emphasis on grains. Whether the replacement is itself free from industry influence is a fair question, but the carbohydrate-first orthodoxy that has shaped American eating for the last three decades needed to go.

So, the nutrition curriculum expansion is a genuine win, and credit should be given where it’s due. But we should still keep a watchful eye on medical schools. Signing onto nutrition instruction does not mean these institutions are broadly returning to science. As I reported in last year’s Speech First report, Critical Condition: How Medical Schools Are Forcing DEI Orthodoxy on Future Physicians, they remain deeply entangled in ideological frameworks such as teaching that obesity has no meaningful link to health outcomes, that biological sex is subordinate to gender identity, and that the physician’s role extends to correcting historical racial injustices.

RFK Jr. has put medical schools on a diet. But a healthy meal won’t cure a sick institution.

Follow Jared Gould on X.

  1. I am of two minds about this.

    On the hand, PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylasis) is necessary to protect irresponsible people who have anal sex without wearing a condom or inject IV drugs with shared needles — to protect them from AIDS.

    Note that this is not the underlying behavior, but choosing not to wear a condom, or choosing not to boil the needle for 10 minutes before injecting, simple behavioral changes that would remove one from the “high risk” group eligible for PrEP.

    PrEP cost $21,000 a year, and as the law requires health plans provided without any co-pay, all of us — who don’t engage in these “high risk“ activities are forced to pay for it. That’s how we wind up with unaffordable health plans with massive co-pays on everything else.

    So yes, it would be advantageous to tell people to stop engaging in these “high risk“ behaviors— and remember I’m only saying “ use a condom and boil the needle” — nothing about the underlying behavior that would’ve been considered criminal 60 years ago.

    But after 40 years of AIDS education is there anyone in this country over the age of 10 who doesn’t know that AIDS is spread by unprotected anal sex and IV drug use with shared needles — is there really anyone who doesn’t already know this?

    Now nutrition is more complicated because the purported “experts“ keep changing their minds. First, it was the four basic food groups, then the food pyramid, then the inverted food pyramid, and now probably something else. I may not be the brightest bulb, but I’ve given up trying to figure out what it is that is supposed to be good for me and what is supposed to be bad for me because IT KEEPS CHANGING…

    The science of the transmission of the HIV virus has been resolved since the 80s, we know as a fact that it’s transmitted through blood and semen, and that hasn’t changed in 40 years. The science of nutrition IS NOT RESOLVED YET, all we can do is teach what it currently is. Remember that if medical schools had been teaching their nutrition 20 years ago, we would now be dealing with all the doctors who were taught the food pyramid foolishness.

    But the larger question here is if one has the right to go to a physician for assistance with medical problems that one wishes to deal with, e.g. high blood pressure, or should the medical profession become some sort of paternalistic, big brother to protect ourselves from ourselves, and that’s pretty much what we saw during the Covid hysteria.

    A lot of medical doctors are now asking that patients if there’s a gun in the house, and while I’m tempted to answer that I have an M1A2 Abrams parked in my driveway, I dread the consequences of doing that. The latest question I got was what sex I “was assigned at birth“ — I wasn’t “assigned“ a sex, I AM male and have an objection to having to participate in this foolishness.

    And then there is the fuselage of social workers that we’re supposed to quietly endure, at our own expense. In my opinion, there’s nothing less useful on God‘s green earth than a social worker, the only thing worse than their leftist indoctrination is that they are freaking stupid on top of that.

    Unable to run their own lives, they wanna run everybody else’s instead.

    And that, Jared, and what bothers me about this. If the government could take the politics out of nutrition and actually summarize the science and have that information available, that would be one thing. But I have 15 minutes with my physician, at least 10 of which are consumed with him furiously typing away on his laptop. And you want to consume the remaining five minutes with stuff that I could find out on my own if I wanted to?

    Back to PrEP — if we have to pay $21,000 a year because people can’t observe common sense health information, what makes you think that people are going to listen to nutrition information either?

  2. Nutrition is already taught in medical schools. Medical students are exposed to didactic lectures. In addition, they are exposed during clinical rotations in cardiology, diabetes, clinics, community medicine, obesity clinics, gastroenterology, and other rotations. To put extensive emphasis on nutrition in medical school is a waste of time, better spent on other areas. Do you want to waste precious medical school time on nutrition for future, Radiologists, anesthesiologists, pathologists, urologists, dermatologist, or neurosurgeons? Residents receive appropriate training in nutrition in their respective residencies, like family medicine or internal medicine. Why should a trial lawyer who drinks methylene blue dictate what medical schools teach? Do doctors dictate what is taught in law schools?

    1. I encountered the food pyramids while substitute teaching between degrees, I consider myself a reasonably informed person, and I’d heard nothing about it.

      It now appears that the food pyramids have been replaced with something else, possibly the food trapezoids. I don’t know what they are, I don’t even know what to google to find them.

      So we’re scheduled to change our minds every five years. That means medical students will have encountered at least two different versions by the time they graduate — and it will change at least six times more during their careers. It’s a classic case of “who’s on first?“

      Forget the unwillingness to listen, MD’s aren’t even going to know what to tell people. Is butter bad? Is butter good? Or does it depend on the phase of the moon?

      And all of this is simplistic knee-jerk recitations. Someone with high blood pressure is supposed to drink less water. Someone with gout is supposed to drink more. What about someone with both????

      But back to butter versus margarine, what do our purported experts have to say about it THIS week?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *