April 16 (UPI) — This updated version includes a statement from a Health and Human Services spokesperson.
A National Institutes of Health senior investigator said he was optimistic about recent leadership changes but now has resigned due to alleged censorship.
Kevin Hall announced his early retirement from his “dream job” at the NIH on Wednesday in a post on X.
“My life’s work has been to scientifically study how our food environment affects what we eat and how what we eat affects our physiology,” Hall said.
“I had hoped to expand our research program with ambitious plans to more rapidly and efficiently determine how our food is likely making Americans chronically sick.”
He recently focused his research on learning why diets that are high in ultra-processed foods are linked to “epidemic proportions of chronic diseases, such as diabetes and obesity,” Hall said.
“Our research leads the world on this topic,” he added.
Recent events caused Hall to question whether he would continue conducting unbiased scientific research at the NIH.
Censorship of research findings
“I experienced censorship in the reporting of our research because of agency concerns that it did not appear to fully support preconceived narratives of my agency’s leadership about ultra-processed food addiction,” Hall said.
He recently raised the matter in a March 28 letter to NIH leadership, including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. and NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.
“When I saw the [Make America Healthy Again] movement gaining bipartisan support last year, it was music to my ears,” Hall said in the letter.
“I thought that after years of defunding human clinical research to understand metabolic disease, perhaps NIH might finally prioritize the studies needed to uncover its root causes.”
He sought discussion of ideas with NIH leaders to study how the nation’s food supply leads to rising instances of chronic diseases.
“We have been hobbled on several occasions with intermittent inability to purchase food for our study participants or obtain research supplies,” Hall wrote.
He cited a recent incident in which an unnamed HHS communications director intervened when the New York Times wanted to interview Hall regarding his study on how the brain responds to ultra-processed foods.
“HHS denied an interview request from the New York Times and contacted the reporter directly to downplay our study results because our data might be viewed as failing to support preconceived HHS narratives about ultra-processed food addiction,” he said in the letter.
“My responses to the reporter’s questions were edited and submitted without my approval.”
‘Bleak’ future for NIH research
Hall afterward told the New York Times he was stopped from freely discussing his work with reporters regarding a study on foods that included chicken nuggets, potato chips, packaged cookies and hot dogs.
Continuing to work under such conditions would cause him to “hate my job every day,” he told the newspaper.
“The future of our studies seems bleak given the inability to replace outgoing trainees who are the workhorses of our research.”
Hall never received a response to his letter, which spurred him to retire early due to concerns that additional censorship would occur.
“The NIH has been a wonderful place because it allows scientists to take risks, from unique collaborations, and do studies [that are] difficult to conduct elsewhere,” Hall said.
“I’m proud of what we’ve accomplished,” he said, “and I’m fortunate to have had such wonderful colleagues and scientific collaborators.”
Hall said he does not have career plans but hopes one day to”return to government service and lead a research program that will continue to guide gold-standard science to make Americans healthy.”
An HHS spokesperson denied Hall’s claims of censorship and interference in scientific research.
“It’s disappointing that this individual is fabricating false claims. NIH scientists have, and will, continue to conduct interviews regarding their research through written responses or other means,” the HHS spokesperson told UPI in an email statement.
“We remain committed to promoting gold-standard research and advancing public health priorities. Any attempt to paint this as censorship is a deliberate distortion of the facts.”
