Infants have rights too. It's against the law for a "seatbelt skeptic" not to put their kid in a safety seat.

I think the idea that changing stated recommendations based on the public opinion is a questionable strategy that can just backfire into more distrust and behavior that follows the "true" best practices even less as they look for the 'sensible position between extremes'[1].

There are a lot of examples from the response to COVID: frequent early mixed messages around the effectiveness of masks for preventing infection and transmission not based on the actual understanding of said effectiveness but in order to manage supply shortages, arguable overstatement about the one-time long-term effectiveness of the initial vaccines against infection and transmission and not just severity of disease, overemphasis on ineffective measures like hand hygiene or six-foot-distancing over effective measures like air cleaning and masking based on the perceived willingness of the public to follow them, reduction of the stated duration of contagiousness without evidence of such.

It's one thing if it's genuinely not known what the best practices are, but knowing and misleading can confuse people who are willing to follow them and can further alienate skeptics who may seek out charlatans promising them the "real, unfiltered truth".

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation

Vaccines eradicated some of the worst diseases humans had. If thousands of kids were paralyzed by polio vaccines would become very popular again.

Common Kennedy is THE person that worked very actively and hard to turn people against vaccines.

He wanted to make them unpopular, partially succeeded and now is trying to remove them.

Maybe we should bring back leeches if we're just going to ignore medical science and instead just go with the feelings of a misinformed public.