When Scientific Arguments Obscure Moral Ones, Democracy Suffers

When U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced last month that military personnel would no longer be required to get the flu vaccine, public health experts criticized the policy change, arguing that it would result in more cases of serious illness and undermine force readiness. They took the opportunity to reiterate that vaccines are safe and effective, a fact that has been famously (though inconsistently) questioned by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 

But Hegseth didn’t attack vaccines or reject science. He asserted that personal freedoms, including religious liberty and bodily autonomy, were of utmost importance. While not disclaiming the goal of preventing illness — vaccines will still be available to service members — he ranked it second to his vision of freedom. This is where the disagreement between the Pentagon and public health experts really lies: Hegseth’s critics see protecting population health as paramount and safeguarding bodily autonomy as secondary.