Hall claims that because of this, aides for Kennedy blocked him from being directly interviewed by New York Times reporters about the study. Instead, Hall was allowed to provide only written responses to the newspaper. However, Hall claims that Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for Kennedy, then downplayed the study’s results to the Times and edited Hall’s written responses and sent them to the reporter without Hall’s consent.
Further, Hall claims he was barred from presenting his research on ultra-processed foods at a conference and was forced to either edit a manuscript he had worked on with outside researchers or remove himself as a co-author.
An HHS spokesperson denied to CBS that Hall was censored or that his written responses to the Times were edited. “Any attempt to paint this as censorship is a deliberate distortion of the facts,” a statement from the HHS said.
In response, Hall wrote to CBS, “I wonder how they define censorship?”
Hall said he had reached out to NIH leadership about his concerns in hopes it all was an “aberration” but never received a response.
“Without any reassurance there wouldn’t be continued censorship or meddling in our research, I felt compelled to accept early retirement to preserve health insurance for my family,” he wrote in the LinkedIn post. “Due to very tight deadlines to make this decision, I don’t yet have plans for my future career.”
