The Emerging Conflict Between MAHA and the Tech Right, By Chris Knight (Florida)

The American Conservative article, published on June 27, 2025, describes a rift within the Trump coalition between the MAHA movement and the tech-right, a faction of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and executives who supported Trump's 2024 campaign. Key points include:

MAHA's Origins and Role: The MAHA movement, rooted in the anti-establishment, anti-Big Pharma wing of the environmentalist left, rallied behind Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 2024 presidential campaign. After Kennedy endorsed Trump and was appointed Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary, MAHA became a significant force in the MAGA coalition, advocating for health policy reform focused on combating chronic disease through natural and preventive measures.

Tech-Right's Influence: Following Trump's victory, tech-right figures like Elon Musk (appointed head of the Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE) and executives from Meta, OpenAI, and Palantir, gained prominent roles. Silicon Valley-backed health start-ups, such as Levels and Truemed, also secured influence through appointments like Casey Means as Surgeon General and Calley Means as a special government employee.

Conflict Over Data and Motives: MAHA activists, including Naomi Wolf and Mary Talley Bowden, accuse the tech-right of exploiting the movement to access valuable biometric and medical data for profit. They criticise Truemed's business model, which automates tax write-offs for health-related products, as a scheme that prioritises corporate interests over MAHA's health-focused goals.

Internal MAHA Tensions: Nicole Shanahan, Kennedy's former running mate, publicly criticised the Means siblings' appointments, alleging they are "Manchurian assets" controlled by external forces, possibly Big Tech. This has sparked an "all-out war" within MAHA, with concerns about the movement being co-opted by corporate interests.

Broader MAGA Fault Lines: The article frames this conflict as part of wider tensions between MAGA's populist base and the tech-right, mirroring disputes over H1B visas and Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill."

The article suggests that the tech-Right's opportunistic alignment with MAHA and MAGA threatens to undermine the health movement's anti-establishment ethos, particularly through the exploitation of sensitive medical data.

The article's argument is grounded in specific examples and credible voices within the MAHA movement, lending weight to its concerns. Naomi Wolf, a prominent MAHA advocate, articulates fears that Silicon Valley is using MAHA as "cover" to access government-held medical data, a concern echoed in posts on X warning of "biometric data mining" by MAHA-aligned tech start-ups. The appointment of Casey and Calley Means, whose companies (Levels and Truemed) focus on health tech and data-driven solutions, raises legitimate questions about conflicts of interest. Truemed's model, which allows tax write-offs for lifestyle products like saunas and organic beef testicles, has drawn scrutiny for its reliance on automated medical necessity letters, as noted in a 2025 Associated Press investigation cited in the article.

The tech-right's growing influence in the Trump administration is well-documented. Elon Musk's role in DOGE, alongside appointments of tech executives to military positions, reflects Silicon Valley's strategic alignment with Trump, as reported in a 2025 Washington Post article. The article's reference to a Vanity Fair investigation into Calley Means' embellished credentials adds credibility to claims of opportunism, suggesting that some tech-right figures may lack the qualifications or alignment with MAHA's grassroots ethos.

The broader context of data privacy concerns supports the article's warnings. A 2024 New York Times report highlighted growing public unease about biometric data collection by tech companies, particularly in healthcare, where sensitive information is vulnerable to exploitation. The MAHA Report, criticised for AI-generated errors in a 2025 Washington Post article, underscores the movement's reliance on data-driven health solutions, which could align with tech-right interests in biometric analytics.

The tension stems from ideological and practical differences:

Ideological Clash: MAHA's roots in anti-Pharma, anti-authoritarian environmentalism, contrast with the tech-Right's embrace of data-driven solutions and corporate innovation. MAHA values natural health and scepticism of institutions, while tech-right start-ups like Levels leverage biometric data for personalised medicine, raising concerns about surveillance and profit motives.

Data Privacy Concerns: Truemed's automation of medical necessity letters and Levels' focus on health metrics (e.g., glucose monitoring) rely on collecting sensitive data, which MAHA activists fear could be exploited by Big Tech, especially given Musk's access to government systems via DOGE.

Political Opportunism: The tech-right's financial support for Trump, including Musk's donations, secured their influence, as noted in a 2025 Al Jazeera article on Silicon Valley's alignment with MAGA. This contrasts with MAHA's grassroots base, creating distrust among activists who see tech figures as co-opting their movement.

The MAHA-tech-right conflict reflects broader fault lines within the MAGA coalition, as outlined in a 2025 New York Times article on the "MAGA's Big Tech Divide." Disputes over H1B visas and tariffs highlight tensions between populists and tech elites, with MAHA's health-focused populism clashing with the tech-Right's market-driven approach. The article's reference to the Green movement's co-optation by "suit-and-tie" environmentalists parallels fears that MAHA is being hijacked by tech interests, a sentiment echoed in a 2025 Politico report on industry influence in the MAHA Commission.

Health policy is a key battleground. The MAHA Report, despite its flaws, targets chronic disease through reforms to nutrition, environmental toxins, and pharmaceutical influence, aligning with public demand for holistic health solutions. However, the tech-Right's push for AI and biometric-driven healthcare, as seen in start-ups like Levels, raises concerns about privacy and corporate control, especially given Big Tech's history of data scandals, as noted in a 2019 American Conservative article.

Data privacy is a critical issue. A 2024 Heritage Foundation report warned that tech companies could repurpose tools for censorship or surveillance, a fear amplified by MAHA's reliance on data-driven health metrics. Posts on X express alarm that MAHA's integration with tech could lead to "technofascism" or transhumanism, reflecting broader anxieties about AI and biometrics.

The conflict has significant implications:

Health Policy: MAHA's agenda could be diluted if tech-Right priorities dominate, shifting focus from systemic reform to profitable tech solutions. Transparent governance and independent oversight of HHS appointments could mitigate this.

Data Privacy: Stronger federal privacy laws, as suggested in a 2025 ITIF report, could address MAHA's concerns by limiting data exploitation while allowing innovation.

Coalition Stability: The MAGA coalition's success depends on balancing populist and tech interests. A 2025 American Conservative article on tech-populist tensions suggests compromise is needed to maintain unity.

Public Trust: MAHA's credibility hinges on addressing internal divisions and distancing itself from corporate influence. Engaging grassroots supporters through transparent communication could rebuild trust.

Future steps include rigorous vetting of appointees, public hearings on health tech policies, and investment in privacy-focused regulations. MAHA could also leverage its platform to advocate for decentralised health solutions, reducing reliance on tech-driven systems.

In conclusion, the American Conservative article highlights a critical tension between MAHA's anti-establishment health reform agenda and the tech-Right's data-driven, corporate-aligned influence within the Trump administration. The conflict reflects deeper ideological divides within the MAGA coalition, where populism clashes with technocratic opportunism. Addressing these tensions requires balancing innovation with privacy protections and ensuring MAHA's focus on health remains uncompromised.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-burgeoning-fight-between-maha-and-the-tech-right/

"President Donald Trump proclaimed victory in 2024 thanks in part due to his success at forging a broad coalition across both the country and political spectrum. Trump's traditional MAGA base was joined by economic moderates, business opportunists, foreign favor-seekers, and anti-interventionists. Perhaps most notably, the Democrat-turned-independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again movement rallied around Trump to help push him over the victory line against Vice President Kamala Harris.

Health-conscious and "expert"-skeptical, the Make America Healthy Again movement, or MAHA for short, was the result of an ideological split in the left-wing, environmentalist green movement.

Once upon a time, activists of the tree-hugging, organic food–purchasing, anti-establishment, hippie variety who had nothing but distrust for Big Pharma and the institutional status quo were widely considered to be as far from the Republican Party as humanly possible.

But in the early 2000s, activists in the green and alternative movement found themselves joined—and soon essentially replaced—by a new breed of suit-and-tie, Trust the Science environmentalist. Epitomized by Al Gore and his documentary An Inconvenient Truth, these new activists were men and women of white coats, bar charts, and peer-reviewed studies with an almost religious devotion to "Science," "Institutions," and "The Data."

When Covid-19 hit in 2020, their mantra "trust the science" quickly morphed into "trust Big Pharma" and "do as you're told," and it became apparent that a split with the anti-authoritarian, pharma-skeptics who built the movement was inevitable.

This group (for the most part) rallied around Kennedy's 2024 presidential campaign, and many of them stood by his side when, in August, Kennedy dropped out of the race to endorse Trump, attaching MAHA to the Republican MAGA coalition. With Trump's electoral victory, and Kennedy's elevation to the position of secretary of health, it is clear who won the battle in the end—the Trust the Science faction having been effectively decimated in the backlash which took place against the illogical authoritarianism of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Nevertheless, as old opponents lick their wounds, a new one looms on the horizon—an faction that has wormed its way, and continues to worm its way, into the Trump administration at an alarming rate: the ever-opportunistic tech-right.

Fresh off Trump's 2024 election victory (which was in part made possible thanks to donations from Silicon Valley allies, including Elon Musk), former adversaries of the America First movement were given passage into the new administration. Musk was appointed head of DOGE, giving him considerable power in government despite the fact this his "department" was officially nothing more than an advisory committee; senior executives from Facebook parent company Meta, OpenAI, and Palantir were appointed lieutenant colonels in the U.S. Army as part of a new detachment specifically formed for Big Tech; and Silicon Valley–backed health startups were also able to take advantage of the new political environment.

Casey Means, an advocate of alternative medicine and the co-founder of the health company Levels, was nominated by Trump to serve as surgeon general after the president withdrew his previous nomination of Janette Nesheiwat. Her brother, Calley Means—a former NeverTrump conservative, lobbyist, and the co-founder of health tech company Truemed—was also made a special government employee.

After Trump announced Casey Means' nomination in May, praising her "impeccable 'MAHA' credentials," Kennedy's former running mate Nicole Shanahan publicly criticized the move.

"It's very strange. Doesn't make any sense," said Shanahan, who wrote that there was "something very artificial and aggressive" about the siblings, "almost like they were bred and raised Manchurian assets."

"I was promised that if I supported RFK Jr. in his Senate confirmation that neither of these siblings would be working under HHS or in an appointment (and that people much more qualified would be)," she continued, before suggesting that somebody seemed to be "controlling" Kennedy's decisions in the Trump administration.

And it wasn't just Shanahan who had concerns. The appointment of the Means siblings to positions of power within the Trump administration has sparked an all-out war in the MAHA movement, with several prominent activists raising alarms over their controversial business ties.

"The Means siblings, I maintain, are representing Silicon Valley's interests, and not ours," wrote MAHA author and activist Naomi Wolf in an article last month. "I said — and again, I stand by every word — that they both appear to be tasked with representing Big Tech's interests in the rush to exploit the gold mine that is the pristine, valuable data — especially our private medical data — that is currently held behind secure doors by the United States Government."

Wolf warned that "the Trump administration was facing a catastrophic security risk," pointing to Musk's unprecedented access to data under DOGE and the Trump administration's already poor track record with cybersecurity, before suggesting that Casey Means had been tasked with "plundering our government data, and of rerouting US health policy, to align with the interests of Big Tech; especially in the booming realm of biometrics."

The Americans For Health Freedom founder Mary Talley Bowden also raised concerns about "conflicts of interest" within the MAHA movement—and Truemed in particular—while a six-month Vanity Fair investigation accused Calley Means of embellishing his history.

Truemed's business model takes letters of medical necessity—the sort of things that used to have to be written down with a pen and paper by a doctor—and automates the process. By filling out an online form, it's possible to write off a huge array of expensive lifestyle products as tax-free health expenses, including indoor saunas, specialty mattresses, and, in the case of Truemed-partnered merchant White Oak Pastures, organic beef testicles.

From Peloton bikes to ergonomic mattresses—items which would usually cost thousands of dollars—Truemed's website advertises a range of high-end, high-tech products which can now effectively be obtained for free (or at least as a tax write-off subsidized by the taxpayer).

For its part, Truemed maintains they aren't up to any funny business. Responding to an Associated Press investigation earlier this month, the CEO and co-founder Justin Mares said the company is "in full alignment" with IRS guidelines on tax write-offs.

"Truemed enables patients to work with providers to use medical funds for root cause interventions like exercise and vitamin D to reverse disease under current law," Mares said.

Undoubtedly there are far worse abuses of taxpayer's money, including the recently gutted USAID, which spent eye-watering sums on boondoggles such as sex changes in Guatemala, puppet shows in Iraq, and condoms for the Taliban. But it's easy to see why MAHA enthusiasts aren't happy about the rewards of their hard-earned victory being seized by well-connected Silicon Valley types.

These tensions between MAHA and the Trump administration's new Big Tech–aligned stakeholders mirror similar tensions between the populist base and the tech faction in the MAGA movement at large, which is probably one of the reasons why Wolf was invited to make her case against Truemed and Levels on Steve Bannon's War Room– a show which has become the go-to media launchpad for skeptics of the tech-right in Trump's coalition."