On December 28, 2025, Le Figaro published in its \u00ab\u00a0Public Health\u00a0\u00bb section an article entitled \u00a0\u00bb In the United States, one year of anti-vax charge by the Minister of Health Robert Kennedy Jr<\/em><\/a> \u00ab\u00a0. Signed by a certain B\u00e9n\u00e9dicte Lutaud and presented as a \u00a0\u00bb decryption<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0, this text denounces a supposed \u00a0\u00bb anti-vaccination offensive<\/em> \u00a0\u00bb led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.<\/strong><\/a>, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) during the second Trump administration. On closer examination, this article actually illustrates the excesses of institutional propaganda disguised as journalism<\/strong>, which favours an alarmist and one-sided narrative to the detriment of balance, contextualisation, science and ethics.<\/p>\n B\u00e9n\u00e9dicte Lutaud is a seasoned author at Le Figaro, specializing in religious news, the Catholic Church and the Vatican. She covered Pope Francis for many years and published a book on influential women with the popes (Femmes de papes, 2021). His professional background does not reveal any specific training or expertise in public health, epidemiology or medical sciences. Dealing with a subject as technical as vaccine reforms and the restructuring of US federal agencies requires particular rigour<\/strong>, especially in a section that is supposed to report facts objectively, rather than opinions.<\/p>\n To give an impression of objectivity<\/strong>, the article reports factual elements confirmed by multiple sources, including the American CDC. He mentions the restructuring of the ACIP advisory committee in June 2025 (replacing the 17 members with experts such as Martin Kulldorff or Robert Malone), the changes to the recommendations on the combined MMRV vaccine and hepatitis B at birth, the end of federal funding for mRNA vaccines against respiratory viruses, and the resurgence of measles with about 2,012 confirmed cases and 3 deaths in the United States in 2025 \u2013 the worst toll in decades. These \u00ab\u00a0facts\u00a0\u00bb highlight real health risks<\/strong>, which she says are linked to an erosion of vaccination coverage. However, Lutaud does not mention that in Canada, there has been a resurgence of measles cases (5000 in 2025 vs. 150 in 2024) without any change in vaccination coverage<\/a>.<\/p>\n However, these elements are presented in a unilateral manner<\/strong>, actively contributing to informational pollution <\/strong>and a form of disinformation by omission. The author systematically describes these measures as an \u00a0\u00bb anti-vaccine offensive<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0, \u00a0\u00bb doublespeak<\/em> \u00a0\u00bb or appointments of \u00a0\u00bb notorious anti-vaxxers<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0, without exploring the factual bases and justifications put forward by the Trump administration<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n RFK Jr. and his collaborators defend these reforms <\/strong>as a response to a massive crisis of confidence<\/strong> in health institutions, aggravated by the management of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Make America Healthy Again<\/a> (MAHA) program, launched by executive order in February 2025, aims to combat the epidemic of chronic diseases (obesity, autism, cancers) through prevention, healthy eating, scientific transparency, and the reduction of conflicts of interest with the pharmaceutical industry within institutions.<\/p>\n Lutaud also fails to mention the recognition of chronic Lyme disease<\/a> by RFK Jr. and a team of scientists, thus marking a breakthrough for patients suffering from this disease often in medical disinheritance.<\/p>\n Another executive order, promulgated in May 2025<\/a> under the leadership of Stanford Professor Jay Bhattacharya<\/a> at the NIH, imposes \u00a0\u00bb reference science<\/em> \u00a0\u00bb standards: reproducibility of studies, absence of bias, and rigorous clinical trials<\/strong>. It is important to remember that in their Senate presentations, Robert Kennedy Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya established that childhood vaccines had never been the subject of randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials<\/strong>, such trials being considered the highest level of evidence. They therefore demand that vaccines meet the same safety conditions<\/strong> as other pharmaceutical products by applying the same standards to them<\/strong>. None of these explanations are mentioned in the article. RFK Jr., Prof. Bhattacharya, Prof. Kulldorff<\/a> or Prof. Malone<\/a>, the other experts indirectly implicated in the article were not solicited for comment. The experts cited by the author, such as Dominique Costagliola (Inserm, retired research director) and Daniel Floret (professor emeritus of vaccinology), defend the majority vaccine consensus. However, in September 2025, Dominique Costagliola was the subject of a formal request to withdraw<\/strong><\/a> from his independent expert mission on the fight against health disinformation, made by the BonSens.org association for alleged conflicts of interest. As the Ministry of Health did not respond within the legal period of two months provided for by French administrative law, this lack of response is equivalent to a tacit decision to accept the withdrawal \u2013 and therefore the end of its mission. Why does the journalist omit this recent controversy<\/strong>, which directly questions the neutrality and impartiality of one of her main sources<\/strong>? Daniel Floret, for his part, is professor emeritus at the Claude Bernard Lyon 1 University. This same university was at the center of a major case discrediting French scientific integrity: the Pradelle-Lega study, published in January 2024 and led by Prof. Jean-Christophe Lega (researcher at Lyon 1), accused hydroxychloroquine of having caused nearly 17,000 deaths during the first Covid wave. Accused of serious methodological fault (biased use of data, selective exclusion of contrary information, use of toxic doses from the RECOVERY study), this publication was retracted in August 2024. Daniel Floret has worked closely with Jean-Christophe Lega within the national regulatory community (HAS) and the academic community in Lyon. It is therefore surprising that Lutaud only questions an expert known for having criticized the American reforms on scientific transparency without giving the floor, for example, to Professor Christian Perronne, who himself collaborated with Professor Floret within the HAS in order to provide a balanced speech. It should be recalled that Professor Perronne, having written the preface to the French edition of Robert Kennedy Jr.<\/a> (The Real Anthony Fauci), wrote in it that he \u00a0\u00bb did not agree with everything he said about vaccines <\/em>\u00ab\u00a0, had the marked advantage of having read Kennedy’s book and therefore of having become familiar with his analyses.<\/p>\n This imbalance violates the fundamental principles of journalistic ethics<\/strong>, as defined by the Munich Charter: the search for truth, the balance of sources, the verification of information and a clear separation between facts and opinions. Published outside the \u00a0\u00bb Opinion<\/em> \u00a0\u00bb section, the article creates an illusion of absolute objectivity, while its alarmist tone (\u00a0\u00bb anti-vax charge<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0, \u00a0\u00bb irresponsible and deliberately misleading advice<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0) makes it a committed text<\/strong>, contributing to the propagation of a biased narrative under the guise of reliable information.<\/p>\n Ironically, this type of unilateral and selective practice <\/strong>is part of Emmanuel Macron’s recent initiatives to \u00ab\u00a0label<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb\u00a0 reliable media<\/a>, via the Journalism Trust Initiative (JTI) of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), which has been supported since November 2025 and emerged from the \u00c9tats g\u00e9n\u00e9raux de l’information. This project aims to certify media outlets that respect \u00ab\u00a0journalistic ethics<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb according to 130 indicators, promoting their visibility on digital platforms while relegating others. Criticized as a potential \u00ab\u00a0Ministry of Truth<\/em>\u00a0\u00bb or disguised censorship (also linked to the October 2025 Paris Declaration on Information as a Public Good),<\/p>\n it illustrates precisely the risk that articles like B\u00e9n\u00e9dicte Lutaud’s\u00a0<\/strong> In a context of widespread mistrust \u2013 81% of French people reject the 2025 Covid vaccination campaign<\/a>, 74% distrust the government and 64% of the traditional media<\/a> according to recent polls \u2013 such a unilateral approach fuels \u00a0\u00bb information pollution<\/em> \u00ab\u00a0. It polarizes the debate instead of informing and reinforces the vicious circle of mistrust that it implicitly denounces. B\u00e9n\u00e9dicte Lutaud, contacted by France-Soir<\/em> , was not available to answer questions.<\/p>\n RFK Jr.’s reforms are controversial and coincide with a worrying resurgence of measles. Caricaturing them without nuance, without contradictory voices, without a context of transparency or chronic disease prevention, and relying on experts who are themselves controversial without pointing it out, is not balanced journalism<\/strong>. This is disguised institutional propaganda<\/strong>, which helps to explain why a growing share of citizens, in France as in the United States, are turning away from traditional media.<\/p>\n For complete information, it is necessary to cross-reference the sources, both the official websites of the HHS and the NIH for the justifications, the CDC or the truly independent media for the health criticisms, and independent studies for the scientific facts.<\/p>\n The debate on public health deserves better than a one-sided partisan analysis.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n
![\"MANY\"](\"https:\/\/www.francesoir.fr\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/max_1300x1300\/public\/2025-02\/IMAGE%20ARTICLE%20%2836%29.png?itok=uPjnRFzn\"\/)
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"Restoring](\"https:\/\/www.francesoir.fr\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/max_1300x1300\/public\/2025-05\/IMAGE%20FRAMEWORK%20%2860%29.png?itok=yCi7JxpH\"\/)
<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"bs\"](\"https:\/\/media.francesoir.fr\/sites\/default\/files\/styles\/max_1300x1300\/public\/2025-12\/FS102025%20-%202025-12-16T201557.816.png?itok=etRQ4GeG\"\/)
<\/p>\n\n
could one day be stamped \u00ab\u00a0reliable\u00a0\u00bb by such a system<\/strong>, while critical voices would be marginalized.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n