Only a few months into 2025, it’s safe to say this has already been a rough year for science. The Trump administration has wasted no time in pushing its agenda on public health—purging government health websites of information it finds objectionable, showing thousands of federal health employees the door, withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), and tapping a vaccine cynic to head the Department of Health and Human Services.

If you keep up with the headlines, you may already know it’s a chaotic situation that seems to change by the day. But we do know that the Trump administration has fired public health employees dedicated to tasks as crucial as improving our donor organ system and preventing infant and maternal deaths. At the same time, efforts are underway to censor the types of health information and data available to the public, as well as to doctors and researchers.

Beginning in late January, thousands of federal health web pages were suddenly purged of information on topics like HIV, birth control, and vaccines. Agency officials said the pages went dark in order to comply with Trump administration directives to remove language related to gender identity or diversity, equity, and inclusion. A federal judge later ordered that the sites be restored, but it was unclear what vital information may have been altered or deleted.

Meanwhile, the most important publication from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, was forced to cease publishing for two weeks—the first hiatus in its 64-year history. That was part of a broader “pause” on communications by federal health agencies, so that Trump administration appointees could review and approve any documents intended for publication. The MMWR disruption came in the midst of a particularly bad flu season, delaying the release of critical data, including studies on the worsening bird flu outbreak. Later, CDC staff were reportedly ordered to shut down a successful campaign to promote flu vaccination, and key meetings of advisory committees to the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration on several vaccines—including next season’s flu shot—were abruptly canceled.

Clearly, we’re in a time where trusted government sources on public health are being vetted by administration appointees who are neither doctors nor researchers, but do have a strong political bent. More broadly, we’re in a time when science itself is increasingly under attack, through the spread of misinformation—and purposeful disinformation—about Covid, vaccines, climate change, and more.

So this month, we’re using this space to underscore our commitment to you: For 40 years, we’ve been presenting you with our take on the best science on health and wellness, and holding ourselves to high standards in doing so. That will not change.

What does the “best science” mean? We do not simply report on the latest study du jour. We carefully choose the research we highlight, leveraging the expertise of our editorial board to critique the scientific methods used in any given study. We also focus on research published in well-respected medical journals that accept studies only after a rigorous peer review process—meaning they are evaluated by other experts in the field. The fact that a study is published does not ensure that it’s scientifically valid; there are a huge number of medical journals out there and, unfortunately, many have poor editorial standards. (There are even “predatory” journals that publish studies purely for profit.)

This is why we put great effort into ensuring our stories are based on the strongest available evidence—which includes looking at the wider context. No single study, however well done, can stand in isolation. So we always strive to illuminate the big picture: How do these new findings fit in with the research that came before? What do they add to our knowledge base? How can you potentially put this new information into use in your life? 

At a time when anti-science voices are taking positions of power, it’s more important than ever for all of us to carefully choose our sources of “truth” around health and wellness. You can trust that we will uphold our standards. We will continue to use solid, peer-reviewed medical journals and well-established sources of data—including the WHO; professional medical societies such as the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Society of Clinical Oncology; and nonprofits like the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association. We will also continue to look to the CDC and other government health agencies, but we’ll be even more vigilant in assessing the quality of the information.

At its heart, good science asks questions and seeks answers; it does not come from a political perspective, make value judgments, or advance an agenda. The tool of science is the best method humans have developed to understand our world. We trust in science. And we know that you, as readers of the Wellness Letter, share that trust.