{"id":492052,"date":"2026-01-04T15:48:25","date_gmt":"2026-01-04T15:48:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/492052\/"},"modified":"2026-01-04T15:48:25","modified_gmt":"2026-01-04T15:48:25","slug":"what-to-watch-as-kennedys-maha-vision-gets-put-to-the-test-in-2026","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/492052\/","title":{"rendered":"What to watch as Kennedy\u2019s MAHA vision gets put to the test in 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"

And yet, the factors that drive tens of millions of people to sickness remain largely intact, if not stronger. The administration began its term by decimating scientific research<\/a> and public health expertise. Congress slashed benefits that support the health of low-income Americans, including millions of children. The MAHA commission\u2019s much-awaited reports landed, in many quarters, with a disappointing thud. Kennedy made a panoply of promises<\/a> but, so far, has watered down or failed to achieved most of them. <\/p>\n

His most enduring legacy from 2025 is dramatically overhauling federal vaccine policy to suit his beliefs, injecting skepticism into the highest ranks of government. (There was also the remarkable press conference about an alleged link between Tylenol and autism<\/a>.) <\/p>\n

Here are three issues we\u2019re keeping an eye on in 2026, which could further cement Kennedy\u2019s legacy, and even have a positive impact on chronic disease. <\/p>\n

What effects will GLP-1 price drops have? <\/p>\n

The benefits of blockbuster GLP-1 drugs<\/a> like Ozempic, Wegovy, and Zepbound have become so convincing, they\u2019ve swayed even a spending-averse president and pharma-vilifying health secretary. The Trump administration\u2019s lower negotiated prices<\/a> on obesity medications could have meaningful effects on public health, experts say \u2014 and perhaps the biggest disease-fighting impact of all the ideas Kennedy has pursued so far. <\/p>\n

Obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other weight-related conditions are leading drivers<\/a> of disability and death in the US, and cost the US tremendously. So while GLP-1s are expensive \u2014 evidenced by exploding prescription drug spending<\/a> in 2025 \u2014 they have proven effective at inducing weight loss and reducing cardiovascular risk, among other things. <\/p>\n

Giving more Americans access to the medications is likely to drive down rates of prevalent and problematic chronic conditions. (Early signs point to a slight decrease<\/a> in obesity rates in 2025, potentially because of the medications.)<\/p>\n

A growing body of evidence also suggests GLP-1s might be useful for treating some substance use disorders<\/a>. If that research proves out, the drugs\u2019 addiction-curbing effects could be another boon to public health. Heavy alcohol use in particular is an underappreciated and common driver of chronic conditions<\/a>, including liver disease and certain forms of cancer. <\/p>\n

All of the big GLP-1 buzz comes with a medium-sized asterisk. While studies up to this point have shown a mostly mild side effect profile, more long-term studies are needed to establish the drugs\u2019 safety when used over the course of many years. Rare but serious problems<\/a>, such as pancreatitis, kidney stones, arthritis, suicidal thinking, and eye disease<\/a>, have to be investigated further. Some experts also worry about GLP-1-induced reductions in lean mass, and how that might contribute to other chronic issues, such as sarcopenia. Companies are actively devising strategies<\/a> to counteract muscle loss in people taking the drugs. <\/p>\n

At the same time, many in the field are racing to figure out new formulations and versions of GLP-1s, including oral pills<\/a>. Those in the world of pediatrics are still debating when the drugs are appropriate for children<\/a> and teens, or if lifelong adherence is actually needed for all patients to maintain the medications\u2019 benefits. These important questions could determine the scale of long-term public health gains, since many people fall off medication regimens over time.<\/p>\n

In 2026, we could start to see the first wave of effects from widespread GLP-1 use. <\/p>\n

\"BoxesBoxes for the medications Wegovy and Zepbound are arranged for a photograph in California on May 8, 2025.JoNel Aleccia\/Associated Press<\/p>\n

How radical will the new dietary guidelines be? <\/p>\n

The debut of the new dietary guidelines is now slated for January after several delays in 2025. Suspense is high among food and nutrition experts about what guidelines might look like under MAHA, particularly when it comes to two big potential changes on saturated fat and ultra-processed foods.Kennedy and other MAHA leaders have said they intend to overturn the current recommendations to limit saturated fat<\/a>, going against the recommendations of the dietary guidelines advisory committee and a wealth of evidence showing that eating too much saturated fat raises LDL cholesterol, the \u201cbad\u201d kind linked with a higher risk of heart disease.<\/p>\n

Jerold Mande, CEO of the nutrition nonprofit Nourish Science and a former senior policymaker on food issues at the Food and Drug Administration and United States Department of Agriculture, said that a change to saturated fat recommendations would be a boon for the meat and dairy industries \u2014 but that the food industry at large would likely prefer maintaining the status quo. \u201cThey don\u2019t see a strong future for animal products. They just keep getting more and more expensive,\u201d he explained. For packaged food companies trying to decide on the sources of fats in their products, \u201cmeat\u2019s just not an option in the long run\u201d \u2014 vegetable oils that contain polyunsaturated fats are a cheaper and more sustainable bet.<\/p>\n

The new guidelines may also make waves by taking a stance against ultra-processed foods, a frequent target of Kennedy criticism \u2014 and a move the advisory committee eschewed<\/a> in 2024, citing the need for more data. <\/p>\n

\u201cIf the dietary guidelines said something about ultra-processed foods that just got people paying attention, I think that would be great,\u201d said Marlene Schwartz, director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Health at the University of Connecticut. But she said the guidelines would also need to provide a definition of what constitutes ultra-processed food, a task that the FDA and USDA have said they plan to take on<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The federally funded school lunch program, which is required to follow dietary guidelines, is one big area that could feel impact from such changes. But first the USDA would need to translate the new recommendations into specific requirements for schools, a process that can take years. New restrictions on added sugar<\/a> and sodium in school meals recently went into effect; before that, the most recent overhaul was the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2012, which required schools to serve more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. <\/p>\n

Schools would also need more government support and resources to shift away from ultra-processed foods and toward fresher meals, said Juliana Cohen, a professor of nutrition and public health at Merrimack College. \u201cIt\u2019s going to be hard for food service directors, who are already working extremely hard to meet school meal standards, to then have to analyze every nutrition label to figure out if this is in fact ultra-processed food,\u201d she said. And many school cafeterias don\u2019t have the infrastructure or equipment to prepare fresh food on-site.<\/p>\n

The more immediate impact might show up in military cafeterias, Mande said. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth \u201ccan change policy without rulemaking,\u201d he said, noting that the military years ago implemented evidence-backed changes like a color-coded nutrition labeling system<\/a> that signals which foods have more processing or higher levels of added sugar and artificial sweeteners. Kennedy specifically mentioned the implications of the new guidelines for the military in a November speech<\/a>. <\/p>\n

Rumor has it the new guidelines may also do away with the oft-overlooked MyPlate symbol<\/a> and replace it with the old food pyramid, turned upside down. Mande notes that this very plot point came up in a 2014 \u201cSouth Park\u201d episode<\/a> as a way to solve chronic disease, with fats and oils positioned at the top. Now, he said, \u201cpeople in positions of power are saying the same thing.\u201d <\/p>\n

Which health-boosting experiments in rural America will get the nod? <\/p>\n

Its name is bold and its $50 billion budget is record-setting, the single largest investment in rural health care since the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, the Senate Finance Committee pronounced in July. <\/p>\n

At first glance, the Rural Health Transformation Program<\/a> appears to be just a conduit for funneling funds to strapped rural hospitals and clinics facing slashed Medicaid spending. (The money is likely to fall far short of filling the Medicaid gap, a University of Pennsylvania analysis<\/a> says.) But there\u2019s more to the story, one that depends on adherence to the MAHA agenda in 2026 and beyond.<\/p>\n

Half of that $50 billion will be shared equally by states that apply. Another quarter will be awarded depending on how rural the state is. The remaining $12.5 billion will be distributed to states whose proposals most closely fit MAHA goals, as espoused by Kennedy as health secretary. That invites speculation on what qualifies as a MAHA program.<\/p>\n

States were encouraged to seek money for \u201cnew and emerging technologies\u201d to bolster prevention and chronic disease management\u201d and for \u201cdata and technology driven solutions\u201d to bring health care services as close to a patient\u2019s home as is possible. Other recommended tech solutions include remote monitoring, robotics, and artificial intelligence. <\/p>\n

Award proposals were due Nov. 6, with decisions to be made by Dec. 31. On Dec. 18 the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services created an Office of Rural Health Transformation<\/a> to provide oversight. Here\u2019s a look at what some states were betting on to gain favor. <\/p>\n