Here’s a bombshell that should make everyone pause: Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s pick for Surgeon General, Dr. Casey Means, has been cashing in by promoting companies with a troubling history of unsafe products. But here’s where it gets controversial—while she champions clean living and nutrition in her Good Energy Living newsletter, launched in January 2024, some of the brands she’s endorsed have been linked to products containing hazardous ingredients, unsafe levels of lead, and even traces of forever chemicals. And this is the part most people miss—her financial ties to these companies raise serious questions about her credibility as America’s top doctor.
Means’ newsletter, filled with feel-good messages like “We are one with nature” and “Inner peace for 2025,” aligns perfectly with her Senate testimony in February 2024, where she called for a “great national healing” to make healthy living the easiest choice. But beneath the surface of her nutritional cheerleading lies a web of sponsorships that blur the line between advocacy and profit. Her newsletter has promoted everything from health powders and teas to skincare and luggage, often from brands that paid her handsomely for the exposure.
Take, for instance, Daily Harvest, a meal kit company that paid Means $12,000 for sponsorship. In her newsletter, she gushed about their products, claiming they made up 20% of her diet. But in 2022, Daily Harvest’s French Lentil & Leek Crumbles sent over 130 people to the hospital, some with acute liver failure, due to an unsafe ingredient. The fallout included recalls, FDA investigations, and lawsuits. Is this the kind of brand a Surgeon General should endorse?
Then there’s Pique, a tea company that paid Means $46,000 to sponsor her newsletter. She raved about their products, calling them “stunning” and “organic.” But the Environmental Research Center found that four of Pique’s products contained lead levels exceeding California’s safety limits. Pique denies the allegations, but the controversy remains. Shouldn’t a public health leader steer clear of such brands?
EnergyBits, another sponsor, paid Means $27,431 to promote their algae tablets. She praised them as “effortless and nourishing,” but the Environmental Research Center found elevated lead levels in the product. Additionally, the Better Business Bureau flagged EnergyBits for making unsubstantiated health claims. Is this the kind of product a Surgeon General should be endorsing?
Critics argue that Means’ focus on minimally regulated wellness products and her lack of an active medical license—she quit her surgical residency in 2018—make her a questionable choice for the role. Dr. Vin Gupta, a practicing pulmonologist, bluntly stated, “If her biggest qualification is that she almost became a doctor and decided she didn’t want to be, she shouldn’t be the nation’s doctor.”
Means claims to partner only with “mission-driven brands” that meet strict nutritional standards, but a 2025 AP investigation revealed she failed to consistently disclose affiliate marketing relationships, as required by the FTC. Does this lack of transparency disqualify her from a role that demands public trust?
At her confirmation hearing, Means faced tough questions from both Democrats and Republicans about her financial ties, past endorsements of psychedelics, and controversial statements about vaccines. When pressed on the flu vaccine’s effectiveness, she dodged the question, deferring to “talking to your doctor.” Is this the kind of leadership America needs in a public health crisis?
Senator Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD) summed it up: “The surgeon general has to be trustworthy. Parents and families have to be able to trust she has basic integrity.” Do you agree? Or do you think Means’ past endorsements are a non-issue? Let’s debate this in the comments—because the stakes couldn’t be higher.
