Can the Make America Healthy Again initiative successfully close the health gap between the US and other developed nations?

Answer Explanations

• No

  user-92676
  Although the initiative identifies important drivers of bad health, the general lack of scientific rigour of the administrative approach signifies a failure.
• Unsure

  user-663996
  Lobby of Pharmaceutical and Food industries is too strong.
• Unsure

  user-180052
  The US life expectancy at 78.8 years versus 82.6 years  when compared to many Western countries is a pathetic story.  There are several basic reasons and fundamental health policy issues needs to be carefully examined   and evidence-based medical practices and  strategies  needs to be addressed understanding root causes of disparities within general and subpopulations to deal with  public health  concerns and challenges. The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) reports have identified some of the root causes of America's health challenges: poor diet and ultra-processed foods, environmental chemical exposure, lack of physical activity and chronic stress, and overmedicalization.Besides, there are many other causes and  issurs which are rooted in  the changing policies and debates who is responsble for the cost ,confusung and  shifting  insurance policies under different political administrations made public health challeges more difficult over the years.
• No

  user-277129
  No universal healthcare
  No system to address social determinants of Health
  Substandard government policy
  Volatile political system
  Systematic racism 
  Constitutionally and culturally embedded gun laws
• Unsure

  user-475102
  Not sure what in entails.
• No

  user-751315
  This is not a scientific initiative, but rather a political stunt run by "influencers" who only care about followers.  Only legitimate health scientists and practitioners ought to be allowed to guide public health, free of political whims.  
  Before we can ensure this, we first need to vastly improve education in the USA, in a way that prioritizes basic science understanding over violent sports and betting.   
• No

  user-578886
  Under RFK Jr., the goal of HHS appears to be to ignore science and dismiss anyone who understands how the scientific process should work. Bringing back infectious diseases that can be prevented through vaccinations will not make American healthy. 
• No

  user-672218
  current directions are not evidence based
• No

  user-569506
  The MAHA initiative does nothing to address the underlying root causes and social determinants of health inequities in the US, which drive the dramatic differences between the US and other developed nations. These include issues such as the enormous gaps in access to wealth, housing, and resources; stigma and discrimination associated with health behaviors and healthcare services; and systemic racism and other structural barriers to equitable healthcare access. Further, effective public health practice requires tailoring and targeting services to those who are the most vulnerable to negative health outcomes; in contrast, the MAHA approach is trying to erase any mention of health inequities and eliminate programs that serve marginalized populations who are often the most in need of support.
• Unsure

  user-247418
  The causes for our current population health issues are multifaceted and MAHA doesn’t seem to recognize all of the most important factors and even for those they do recognize they seem very reluctant to take the necessary aggressive steps to deal with them. Also, their focus on chronic disease shouldn’t be at the expense of neglecting infectious disease, but it seems they’re very willing to underfund efforts to prevent the latter.
• No

  user-823481
  Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) by itself is unlikely to fully close the U.S. health gap with other high-income countries in the short term (next 5–10 years). Meaningful narrowing is possible over decades but only if MAHA (or any equivalent effort) commits to a sustained, well-resourced, cross-sector package of reforms that target social determinants, injury/substance harms, and primary-care/public-health capacity. 
• Yes

  user-684526
  Too long we have ignored things that could have a positive impacts on our health in favor of treated diseases caused by our unhealthy lifestyles.
• No

  user-494424
  It doesn’t provide for health care for all independent of their ability to pay. 
• No

  user-223241
  The MAHA movement is not based in science but in science fiction. Undermining access to healthcare and food and spreading disinformation regarding vaccines (other goals of the same administration) ultimately undo any possible theoretical benefit from banning a food dye.  
• No

  user-868575
  No, it will make it worse. Medical/health decisions are being made not on scientific evidence or data but on the trivial machinations of incompetent and unqualified government officials put in place for political reasons.
• Yes

  user-234128
  Better access to quality foods with less harmful chemicals.
  Capacity to choose between healthcare practitioners for consumers, as well as increased competition between care providers, leading to better services.
• Yes

  user-123942
  Grant generously to private organization for quick and accurate results.
• No

  user-813332
  Arrogance is not respected by disease or illness.
• No

  user-446741
  The health gap is a wealth gap. Provide equal health care to all regardless of income and you will solve the gap.
• No

  user-461871
  Some of his policies make some sense (e.g., removing dyes from foods), but others make no sense at all (e.g., the relationship between acetaminophen and autism).
• No

  user-47615
  On the one hand, the MAHA initiative is based on quack therapies, scientifically disproven hypotheses, and therapeutic approaches. The anti-vaccination campaign is extremely harmful, as it will probably result in the re-emergence of diseases such as measles, smallpox, and tuberculosis. This was evident in the recent measles outbreak in western Texas, which spread to New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Kansas.
  In addition, the new “Big Beautiful Bill”, which will result in tax reductions for some, will consequently lead to a significant reduction in public healthcare funding (Medicare/Medicaid). This will eventually widen the gap between life expectancy in the US and that in other developed countries. 
• Yes

  user-510547
  If other developed countries able to achieve (with much smaller spendings), the U.S. can do as well with proper focus
• No

  user-666869
  US expertise is in treatment, not prevention.
• Yes

  user-451765
  A focus on change and not status quo - the way we have always done. I think once HHS determines who the advisory board will be with HHS and CMS will help to determine the objectives that would allow for a better response to this question
• No

  user-479360
  Maha does not seem to have a solid and consistent basis in actual science. 
  
  
• No

  user-516270
  1) The four root causes identified by MAHA are important but not the most important causes of the Americans' poor health.
  2) After nine months in the office, no measures have been taken yet to fix even those four causes.
  3) Most of the MAHA priorities are in conflict with the other priorities of these administration.
• No

  user-642568
  The current administration is making public health decisions based on politics and not science
• Unsure

  user-255132
  Make America Healthy Again initiative, my timely initiation for the US. But whether it is successful in closing the health gap between the US and other developed nations is determined within a different scope. Mainly the initiative is bounded with short-term political goals rather than the underlying determinants of the century.
• Yes

  user-566604
  US is an advanced country and better than any other countries in avoiding healthy gaps, therefore making America healthy again is helping the other world in healthy and wealthy situation, it could be through training
• Yes

  user-926703
  The success of the "Make America Healthy Again" initiative in closing the health gap with other developed nations depends on several key factors:
  
  

  1. Policy Implementation: Comprehensive, evidence-based strategies and adequate funding are essential.
     
     
  2. Healthcare Access: Achieving universal coverage and reducing out-of-pocket costs can improve access for all citizens.
     
     
  3. Focus on Preventive Care: Emphasizing preventive services and public health education can lead to better health outcomes.
     
     
  4. Addressing Social Determinants: Tackling factors like housing, nutrition, and education, along with community engagement, is crucial for reducing disparities.
     
     
  5. Data-Driven Approaches: Ongoing research and monitoring of health metrics can guide effective policy adjustments.
     
     

  Challenges
    - Political Will: Gaining bipartisan support can be difficult.
    - Cultural Attitudes: Changing perceptions around healthcare and government roles is a significant hurdle.

  
  In summary, while the initiative has potential, its effectiveness will rely on strategic implementation and a commitment to addressing broader health determinants.
  
  
• No

  user-153764
  The notion that removing color dyes used in processed foods will reduce US morbidity rates is misguided.  Far more important is obesity due to high sucrose and other sugars found in beverages and processed foods taken together with sedentary lifestyle.
• Unsure

  user-745157
  Not read it (I’m Canadian)
• Yes

  user-367398
  Proponents would argue that MAHA's focus on certain areas could make a positive difference:

  -Price Transparency and Lowering Drug Costs: If successful, this could genuinely reduce the financial barrier to care for some Americans. High out-of-pocket costs are a major reason people skip needed care, so reducing these costs could improve access.
  
  - Promoting Competition: The theory is that increased competition among insurers and providers could drive down prices, making healthcare more affordable and accessible.
  - Focus on the Opioid Crisis: A dedicated effort to a specific, devastating public health crisis could help reverse the trend of declining life expectancy, which is a major factor in the U.S. lag.
  
  
• No

  user-956542
  Based on key health indicators, the answer is likely No, the "Make America Healthy Again" initiative, as currently framed, is unlikely to successfully close the health gap.
  
  

  
  Here is a breakdown of the reasoning:
  
  

  
  The United States consistently lags behind other developed nations in outcomes such as:
  
  

  • Life Expectancy: Has fallen behind and continues to widen the gap.
  • Maternal and Infant Mortality: Rates are significantly higher.
  • Preventable Deaths: Higher rate of deaths from preventable causes.
  • Chronic Disease Burden: Higher prevalence of obesity, heart disease, and diabetes.

  
  Closing this gap would require addressing the root causes, which the "Make America Healthy Again" initiative, based on its stated goals and the political environment it exists in, does not appear to comprehensively tackle. These root causes include:
  
  

  1. The Fragmented and Expensive Healthcare System: The US system is a complex mix of private and public funding, resulting in the highest per-capita spending in the world while leaving millions underinsured or uninsured. Fundamental systemic reform is not a central pillar of the initiative.
  2. Social Determinants of Health: Factors like poverty, education, housing, and nutrition are estimated to account for up to 80% of health outcomes. The US has higher levels of income inequality and weaker social safety nets than many comparable nations.
  3. Public Health Infrastructure: Chronic underinvestment in public health agencies and functions (disease surveillance, community health programs) limits the ability to respond to crises and promote population health.
  4. Behavioral and Environmental Factors: Issues like the opioid epidemic, gun violence, and car-centric city design create unique American health challenges that require multi-faceted, long-term solutions.

  
  While the initiative may focus on positive goals like increasing innovation and choice, it does not propose the kind of fundamental, systemic changes or massive public investment in the social determinants of health that would be necessary to catch up to countries with universal healthcare and stronger social welfare systems.
  
  
• Unsure

  user-146840
   The primary causes of America's poor health outcomes—unhealthy diets, environmental pollutants, stress and inactivity, and overmedicalization—are all specifically addressed by the Make America Healthy Again campaign. It could reduce the health disparity with other industrialized countries if it is properly implemented with openness and strict regulation. Its eventual success is doubtful, though, as previous U.S. health reforms have frequently failed because of industry influence, fragmented healthcare delivery, and lax enforcement. 
• No

  user-540700
  The four presumed root causes of America's health challenges: poor diet and ultra-processed foods, environmental chemical exposure, lack of physical activity and chronic stress, and overmedicalization are in my opinion not root causes but in fact symptoms of deeper causes. If these deeper causes are not addressed, focussing on these four factors will not improve overal American health. Political decisions that I see are rather exacerbating these deeper causes, so I would not trust that the MAHA agenda will improve overal American health, but rather, they may not address the mentioned factors and/or shift the problem to other health issues.
• No

  user-402166
  As I understand the assessment and strategy reports, the MAHA initiative is attempting to address long-term chronic health problems in the U.S. through a series of acute interventions aimed to improve child nutrition, decrease the normalized sedentary lifestyle, and promote other common health prevention strategies. However, while components of this initiative may be successful, it will not close the current health gap because the initiative fails to acknowledge the prevailing cause of this gap. The cause of this gap is the increasing cost of living, low accessibility of non-processed foods, and the widening gap in quality of life between top decile of earners and the rest of the population. Multiple studies in the fields of economics and public health in American communities have confirmed the relationship between poverty and health. The current issues facing the American health system, which I believe are importantly recognized in the MAHA assessment report, are simply products of an environment characterized by inequality and poverty. The health gaps between rich Americans and the rest of the population are similar to the health gaps between the U.S. as a whole and the world's best performing nations.
• Unsure

  user-760354
  Depends on the response to this strategy from the public 
• Unsure

  user-267787
  I believe that we need to have improvement in the quality of our food, educate families on healthy eating and lower the costs of healthy foods. We should prioritize activity, but with our work culture so busy it makes it hard to find time for adults to exercise. What is not addressed is that we have larger cities with decreased public transportation than other countries so driving is prioritized over public transportation and walking. We also need strong public health infrastructure and access to healthcare for all to improve preventative medicine. 
• No

  user-520432
  The main thrust of MAHA is redistribution of wealth to the very wealthy rather than to the poorest, and majority of the country.
• No

  user-449711
  The chief driver of chronic disease and early death are linked to societal factors (broken families, inner city unemployment, lifestyle choices, lack of exercise and excessive consumption).
• No

  user-553491
  Insufficient physical activity is the only one of the factors mentioned that is supported by solid evidence. Other key factors not mentioned include a very prevalence of obesity, poor access to medical care among the poor, and income inequality.
• No

  user-476126
  The MAHA initiative is full of half-baked and misleading information.  For example, MAHA decries ultraprocessed foods, but nowhere in the document is UPF fully defined.  This is just one example of the oversimplification and half-truths baked into the initiative. 
• Unsure

  user-533517
  As board certified PhD toxicologist, exposure to chemical pollutants is NOT a factor; however, diet, physical activity and Christianity are major factors in health.
• No

  user-72077
  Attributing morbidity and mortality to ostensibly modifiable individual-level factors and behaviors shifts accountability away from the true root causes of poor health outcomes and health disparities in the US-the inequitable systems of power that systematically disadvantage the less privileged and limit people's ability to achieve optimal health. 
  
  
• No

  user-784583
  Science is not informing the strategy.
• No

  user-158538
  I do not believe the Make America Healthy Again initiative can fully close the health gap between the United States and other developed nations. While its goals are commendable, the initiative does not sufficiently address the underlying structural problems driving America’s poor health outcomes. Deep income inequality, unaffordable healthcare, and a profit-centred medical system create barriers that extend far beyond individual lifestyle choices.
  
  

  Moreover, U.S. health policy is often fragmented and shifts with political cycles, limiting the long-term continuity needed for sustained improvement. Without tackling the root causes — poverty, healthcare accessibility, and preventive infrastructure — initiatives like MAHA are likely to achieve only modest, short-term gains rather than lasting change.
  
  
• Yes

  user-940530
  MAHA seems like a movement to try to increase the awareness of the general public about disease prevention, which has generally been lacking in the past. The main issue is lack of education. Most of the diseases treated by physicians are preventable, and those that are not would be much better if the public had a healthier diet and more physical activity. 
• No

  user-745678
  Commercial interests in profit margin compete seriously with better interests of health promotion and disease prevention
• Unsure

  user-97011
  There is a likelihood of MAHA being politicised thus the rootcauses of the health challenges experienced by americans fail to the be sufficiently addressed 
• No

  user-919787
  It mentions nothing about the growing disadvantaged community issues or addressing the health problems that exist therein. It mentions nothing about failing infrastructure and the relationship to public health. It does not explicitly mention public health and has defunded several hundred programs already. It does not mention infectious disease and multiple drug resistant organisms. 
• No

  user-321504
  It may narrow the gap, but I doubt the initiative will fully close it.  Improving diet and encouraging physical activity will help.  But other causes of America's health challenges I think have greater impact than the other "root causes"; more on those below.   
• Unsure

  user-229823
  The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative has the potential to reduce certain aspects of the health gap between the US and other developed nations, but full closure of that gap is uncertain. Success will depend on consistent policy implementation, equitable access to healthcare, preventive health programs, addressing social determinants of health (like income, education, and environment), and sustained political commitment.
  
  The US currently faces challenges such as high healthcare costs, unequal access, and lifestyle-related chronic diseases, which require long-term structural reforms. While MAHA can improve outcomes if executed effectively, closing the entire gap will likely require coordinated efforts across healthcare, education, and social policy sectors over many years.
• Yes

  user-725842
  I believe that, in its current form, the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative, while well-intentioned, is unlikely to fully close the health gap between the United States and other developed nations. 

   

  Countries such as Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Japan, Switzerland, and Iceland maintain better child health outcomes due to their emphasis on preventive care, balanced diets, low inequality, accessible healthcare, and strong social safety nets. The MAHA report correctly identifies key drivers of declining child health, such as poor diet, chemical exposure, sedentary lifestyles, and over-medicalization, and proposes valuable preventive strategies.

   

  However, unlike the comprehensive public-health and social-welfare systems established in the aforementioned countries, the MAHA framework does not incorporate universal healthcare access, equitable social supports, or population-wide policy integration. Its reliance on voluntary, market-based reforms and institutional coordination limits its capacity to achieve parity with these nations, which operate under more unified, prevention-focused health infrastructures. 

   

  Therefore, while MAHA may improve health outcomes and reduce certain disparities, it is unlikely to eliminate the structural and systemic differences that sustain the U.S. health gap in comparison to other advanced nations, where child health metrics remain significantly stronger.
• Yes

  user-728758
  America can make her citizen healthy paying special attention on:
  1. Dietary modification 
  2. Work site based activity 
  3. Environmental hazards and pollution 
• Unsure

  user-206197
  Maybe, but only if MAHA becomes serious, evidence-based, and bipartisan. Right now it is a start, not a guarantee. This is why I say that.
  
  

  MAHA shines a light on real problems like poor diets and ultra-processed foods, chemical exposures, inactivity/stress, and patterns of over-medicalization are all plausibly contributing to rising childhood chronic conditions. The administration’s reports lay out a long list of actions and a research agenda that could move the needle if translated into strong policy and sustained funding. But the size of the U.S. health gap is big and multi-layered. The US spend more per person on health care than comparable countries yet have lower life expectancy and worse outcomes in many areas; that gap reflects not just medical care but poverty, housing, education, injuries (including gun violence), substance use, and unequal access to prevention. Fixing food labels or launching a few campaigns won’t close that gap by itself. You need broad, sustained work on social determinants and structural drivers. There is reason for urgency: roughly four in ten U.S. school-aged kids have at least one chronic health condition, so the human stakes are enormous, and this is not just an abstract policy, its childhoods and futures. But it also means solutions must be big, evidence-based, and implemented at scale: fiscal tools (taxes, subsidies), regulation (marketing limits, chemical safety), urban planning (active transport), and strong social safety nets.
  
  

  Politics matters. Right now MAHA is entangled with partisan debates and some controversial claims, which reduces the chance of broad, durable policy adoption. Public health wins in the U.S. usually come when there’s bipartisan buy-in and clear, transparent science guiding policy (think seat-belt laws, smoking restrictions, vaccines). If MAHA can steer toward consensus, rely on independent science, and avoid politicized messaging, its chances improve. So: can it close the gap? I would say it could contribute meaningfully, however, only as one part of a bigger, long-term push that (1) focused on equity , (2) scales proven population strategies such as food environment changes, chemical controls, built environment, (3) invests in social determinants (early childhood, housing, income supports), and (4) protects the science from partisan swings. Without those, MAHA risks becoming a policy wishlist or a short political moment, not a durable solution.
  
  

   
  
  
• Yes

  user-253845
  Short answer: Yes, but only if it targets proven levers and demands accountability.
  The U.S. health gap is policy-made, not biology-bound: nations that outperform us do so through universal health coverage, strong family and income supports, and environments that foster purpose, connection, and equitable opportunity.
  A Make America Healthy Again agenda that links health care reform, family supports, and walkable, well-connected cities, while promoting digital literacy and healthy technology use, could—with clear outcome targets across all income groups—close the gap and build a healthier, more cohesive nation.
• Unsure

  user-821097
  The Make America Healthy Again initiative could close the health gap between the U.S. and other developed nations if it addresses key issues like improving access to healthcare, focusing on preventative care, reducing lifestyle-related diseases (e.g., obesity, diabetes), and tackling social determinants of health (e.g., poverty, education). Success depends on adopting global best practices, reducing disparities, leveraging technology, and overcoming political and cultural barriers. Key metrics for progress include improving life expectancy, reducing chronic disease rates, and lowering infant mortality.
• No

  user-828728
  I´ts´ missing concrete action to address the identified issues.
• No

  user-830644
  The roots of the unhealthy situation of USA are based on their socio-economical model of development which is extremely difficult to change or overcome
• No

  user-109750
  It is far to complex to fix with that initiative
• No

  user-272301
  Access to health services are difficult because of costs particularly for lower socioeconomic groups. Also the incentives of an insurance based system work against improving population health.
  Public health strategies are not in line with evidence, for example the use of vaccinations. 
  The inverse care law is clearly visible in US society. 
• No

  user-914188
  To be successful there needs to be wide-scale policy reform on food quality, use of chemicals, environmental regulation, etc. backed up by proper monitoring and assessment. The US needs to strengthen its environmental agencies, not diminish them. 
• Yes

  user-496928
  It is important to establish multidimensional, multilateral holistic approach to assess different health issues and define comprehensive agile interactive programs 
• Unsure

  user-948517

  Raporda tespit edilen çok sayıda risk faktörü arasında sorunun en temel belirleyicisinin, gelir dağılımındaki eşitsizlikler ve bunun sonucunda koruyucu sağlık hizmetlerine erişimdeki kısıtlamalar olduğunu düşünüyorum.

  
  
• No

  user-965103
  The health gap is caused by inequity. Rich Americans don't experience a gap, it's the poor who are living at developing-country level, both in terms of socioeconomic status, which is closely linked to health, and in terms of actual health care access.
• No

  user-644666
  Because it is moving away from evidence-based science and medicine.
• Unsure

  user-174815
  It is possible if done correctly.  Poor health behaviors, including smoking/vaping, poor diet quality, and inadequate physical activity, are the leading causes of premature death in the United States.  If thoughtful and impactful interventions were developed, we could hope to move the needle on chronic disease prevalence.
• Yes

  user-279844
  It is a commendable program to address a long-standing problem.
• No

  user-657460
  Health of Americans is being undermined by Executive (Donald Trump) and HHS Secretary (RFK Jr) initiatives -- many, including downsizing federal agencies responsible for public health and failure to rely on established scientific facts.
• No

  user-543438
  It doesn't really matter what  the MAHA says or does. If vaccination continues to be slandered in the American government and the American people find them to now be safe, we will slip into a third world country issue of having the common communicable diseases that HAD been irradicated now being a primary concern. We really can't concentrate on chronic conditions and long-term health if we (as a country/population) don't overcome communicable diseases.
• Yes

  user-839240
  There should be regular health awareness programmes in the communities. This should also be integrated in the 
  school curriculum from the primary schools to imbibe a healthy culture in the communities, right
  from school age. Healthcare providers such as pharmacies and religious organisations should be given incentives and encouraged to organize regular health awareness programmes in their communities as well, as they are closer to the people and can influence their behaviour.
• No

  user-37600
  The MAHA group understands the problem, but has no clue about the solutions-- their approach will just make things even worse.
• Unsure

  user-271773
  The MAHA Strategy Report provides recommendations that may improve health outcomes; however, whether and how the recommendations will be addressed in funding and regulatory change remains to be seen.  Some recommendations of the MAHA Strategy Report seem biased against specific interventions (e.g., vaccines, flouride) that have evidence of improvement in health outcomes. However, this apparent bias is directed at increasing research which, if done at the "gold standard" level identified in the Strategy Report, should be useful in understanding net health benefit and targeted implementation of the interventions.  
• No

  user-869302
  MAHA's sole purpose is to foster litigation. RFK is a trial attorney and that is the lens through which he views his current role at HHS. He needs judges and juries to have a negative opinion of food companies and pharmaceutical companies so that his allies (and son) can sue them for personal injuries.
• No

  user-777357
  With cuts in funding research the US will fall behind other countries.
• No

  user-984622
  Tackling such challenges requires competent leadership with a strong understanding of root causes of such issues and organizations working effectively together to promote health and wellness.  The MAHA movement is in the phase of raising issues that are already well-understood, but is not taking serious or realistic approaches to solving those problems.
• No

  user-82237
  Disregarding science has no place in health care policy.
• Yes

  user-910913
  There are enough resources available for that to be executed
• No

  user-426175
  Political campaigns do not help rather worsens the situation.  Universal healthcare coverage and free but mandatory screening would help. Doctors' profit-pursuing should be restricted, along with limiting their liability.
• No

  RAR53
  At best it’s a partial solution largely useful for improved diet.   Whatever benefit may exist is grossly outweighed by an antagonistic stance on science, especially evidence based medicine.
• No

  user-606148
  MAHA’s emphasis on ultraprocessed foods might have some promise, but there is very little evidence based practice built into the policy
• No

  user-673903
  This question has to be a joke! MAHA takes away women's reproductive rights, discourages vaccinations, taking away or drastically reducing affordable health care and now encourages saturated fats in the diet. Seriously??
• No

  user-53122
  It goes from excellent evidence-based policies to those with less, little, or no evidence. The US pays much more for medicine that similar developed countries, but has  worse health outcomes overall and reducing life expectancy
• Yes

  user-709065
  The many education campaigns on public health in the US will close the gap between the US and the developed nations. 
• Unsure

  user-361025
  With the growing trend of mobility and rampant diseases of transboundary nature, the efforts made in limited geographic locations may not be sufficient.
• No

  user-640046
  Putting qualified and knowledgeable people in charge of Health is step 1. Leaders embracing conspiracy theories won't help to solve the problem. However, I do agree that it is crucial to address diet and the reduction of ultra-processed foods and unnecessary additives.
• Unsure

  user-558408
  MAHA contains components that could reduce certain health risks (better nutrition policy, emphasis on prevention). But as currently reported — given controversial leadership positions, proposed cuts to federal public-health capacity, and the absence of clear large-scale reforms on coverage and social determinants — it’s unlikely to close the U.S. health gap with other developed nations by itself. For the initiative to be truly successful, you’d need large, sustained, evidence-based structural reforms plus robust public-health capacity and bipartisan political support.
• Yes

  user-231028
  If the policy is effectively implemented and inclusive, it will definitely improve the health outcome of the state. But if it is not inclusive, those excluded will influence it's failure.
• No

  user-613845
  More work in international collaborative research , building networks and capacity building 
• Unsure

  user-538894
  if reduced costs for pharmaceuticals will increase adherence to best treatment options this can lead to better outcomes. Not sure whether this can compensate for ultra-processed food and physical inactivity!
• No

  user-445218
  These so-called leaders do not have the background to make this work.  They are ideologs motivated by politics and not science.
• No

  user-511592
  it doesn't adress the core issues and just creates fear
• Unsure

  user-708958
  I am not the US citizen and I have very superficial view on the initiative Make America Healthy again.
• Unsure

  user-274801
  This initiative should allocate a budget and focus on access to healthy, unprocessed food for low-income large families who may lack information on this topic. For example, short supply chains could be established by partnering with local farmers, as well as school canteens, company restaurants, and solidarity restaurants, which would join this initiative by donating what has not been consumed or selling at low cost. Regarding the food industry, discussions could take place because, paradoxically,  sugary foods (sugary drinks, chocolate bars), junk food (burgers, fries), and ultra-processed foods (chips, snacks, industrial biscuits) are those that benefit from the greatest number of promotions. This therefore encourages their purchase by low-income large households.
• No

  user-679764
  Cannot be successful because it is not based on biological, medical, or social science.  It is based on conspiricy theory nonsense, racism, and anti-science political posturing.