President Trump Establishes Make America Healthy Again Commission: Implications for Life Science, Journal Publications and Continuing Healthcare Education

President Donald J. Trump recently signed an executive order establishing the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission, a bold initiative aimed at addressing the growing health crisis in the United States, with a particular focus on childhood chronic diseases.  The commission is tasked with providing initial recommendations to the President by May 23, 2025, and final report by August 12, 2025.   The executive order gives special emphasis on avoiding conflicts of interest and open source publishing for government sponsored trials.  This move could have significant implications for life science, journals and continuing healthcare education and practice in the coming years.

Key Components of the MAHA Commission

The MAHA Commission, chaired by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., brings together leaders from various federal agencies, including the FDA, CDC, and NIH. Its primary objectives include:

1. Investigating the root causes of chronic illnesses
2. Promoting preventative health measures
3. Enhancing research transparency
4. Assessing medication practices
5. Exploring environmental and lifestyle factors affecting health

Research and Data Transparency

The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission and Open Source Data and Conflict of Interest

Throughout the executive order, there is tread that emphasises avoiding conflicts of interest and open sources publishing of data.

In Section 2(a) of the executive order, it states that “all federally funded health research should empower Americans through transparency and open-source data, and should avoid or eliminate conflicts of interest that skew outcomes and perpetuate distrust”.

The Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment, to be submitted within 100 days, is tasked with “establish[ing] a framework for transparency and ethics review in industry-funded projects”.

One of the Commission’s main policy directives is to “Empower Americans through transparency and open-source data and avoid conflicts of interest in all federally funded health research”.

The executive order calls for “restoring the integrity of science, including by eliminating undue industry influence, releasing findings and underlying data to the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, and increasing methodological rigor”.

This emphasis on open source and focus on undue industry influence for researchers, could lead to more stringent disclosure requirements and pressure to make data and methods more accessible.

Life science companies may need to adapt their publication and data sharing practices, potentially impacting how they conduct and report clinical trials.

The MAHA Executive Order’s emphasis on open source could compel scientific journals to adopt more transparent publishing practices especially for federal government funded research, including expanded open access policies, stricter data sharing requirements, and more transparent peer review processes. This shift may necessitate significant changes in journals’ business models, copyright policies, and impact metrics, potentially reshaping the landscape of scientific publishing towards greater accessibility and reproducibility of research.

Journals also might need to strengthen their conflict-of-interest policies and enforcement mechanisms, particularly for editors and reviewers

Universities may need to update their intellectual property policies to better accommodate open-source software development and distribution by faculty and students.

CME providers may need to reevaluate their interest and sourcing policies to focus on open-source journals.

Life Sciences

The MAHA Commission’s focus on transparency and conflict of interest could significantly affect the life sciences industry:

• Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies may face increased scrutiny of their research practices and clinical trial designs.
• There could be a push for more open sharing of raw data from clinical trials, potentially altering how companies protect their intellectual property.
• The emphasis on preventative health measures might shift research priorities towards lifestyle interventions and non-pharmaceutical treatments.

Journal Publications

Scientific journals may need to adapt their policies and practices in response to the MAHA Commission’s directives:

• Journals could be pressured to adopt or expand open access publishing models, making research freely available to the public.
• Stricter data sharing requirements for authors might become standard, including sharing of raw data and analysis code.
• Peer review processes may need to become more transparent, potentially including open peer review or publishing of review reports.

Continuing Healthcare Education

The MAHA initiative could lead to significant changes in continuing medical education (CME):

• CME providers may need to update their content to reflect new priorities in preventative health and lifestyle interventions.
• There could be increased emphasis on training healthcare professionals in critical evaluation of medical literature and evidence-based practice.
• CME programs might need to incorporate more interdisciplinary content, covering topics like environmental health and public policy.
• Stricter guidelines for managing conflicts of interest in CME, including more rigorous disclosure requirements for financial ties to industry, may be implemented.

Other stakeholders in the healthcare and research ecosystem may need to reevaluate their practices to ensure transparency and minimize potential conflicts of interest.

These potential changes underscore the need for stakeholders in life sciences, scientific publishing, and medical education to stay informed about the MAHA Commission’s ongoing work and be prepared to adapt their practices to align with new federal health priorities.