Did RFK jr say he had a worm removed from his brain
Executive summary
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has said a parasitic infection showed up on his brain scans, and major outlets reported he told doctors a worm “ate a portion” of his brain before dying; The New York Times coverage and subsequent reporting say the mass was identified as a dead parasite [1] [2] [3]. Some contemporaneous and later accounts, including an excerpt from a book by Olivia Nuzzi, report Kennedy privately told her a doctor later concluded the shadow on scans “was not a worm,” creating conflicting narratives [4] [5].
1. What Kennedy publicly said: the worm-in-the-brain line that circulated
In sworn testimony and interviews, Kennedy described a doctor telling him that a dark spot on his brain scan “was caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died,” a formulation picked up by major outlets and summarized in reporting about his past neurological symptoms [1] [2] [6]. Reporting traces the anecdote to deposition material and Kennedy’s own recounting of events around 2010 when he experienced cognitive problems and was evaluated for what initially looked like a tumor [3] [1].
2. Medical context: what “brain worms” usually mean and how clinicians described his case
Journalists and clinicians reporting on the story placed Kennedy’s episode in the well‑known category neurocysticercosis—larval pork tapeworm infection—where a dying cyst or parasite can cause focal inflammation, memory loss and “brain fog.” Experts told STAT and MedPage Today that such infections can produce the symptoms Kennedy described and that dead parasites can leave a lasting scar or “shadow” on scans [2] [7]. Reporting notes his symptoms later improved and that physicians told him the parasite did not require ongoing treatment in his case [6].
3. Contradictory account: private denials reported by journalists
Several later pieces, including excerpts and book reporting by Olivia Nuzzi and others, say Kennedy privately told her the abnormality was not actually a worm and that a trusted doctor reviewed scans and told him it “was not a parasite.” Those accounts directly contradict the public-deposition phrasing and have been reported by outlets such as The Daily Beast, Vanity Fair excerpts, and HuffPost summaries [4] [5] [8]. Available sources do not resolve whether the two accounts reflect different doctors, evolving interpretations, shorthand language, or rhetorical choices by Kennedy (not found in current reporting).
4. How journalists handled the factual uncertainty
Mainstream health and news outlets reported both the deposition/interview statements and the medical interpretation that a parasite had been present; they also flagged the ambiguity when later reporting surfaced the claim he later told a journalist it “was not a worm.” PBS, STAT and Healthline described the clinical diagnosis and symptoms, while later cultural and book excerpts raised questions about Kennedy’s own private framing of the event [3] [2] [6] [4]. Reporters emphasized the original documents and doctor comments as primary sourcing for the “worm” claim [1].
5. Treatment and clinical implications cited in reporting
Reporting explained that brain parasites, when symptomatic or dying, can create inflammation responsible for cognitive changes and that treatment varies—many cases are managed medically, and sometimes surgery is used if a cyst blocks fluid pathways—context relevant to why Kennedy would have been evaluated for a tumor and why a parasite diagnosis might be reached [7] [2] [6]. Sources note that in Kennedy’s account doctors concluded the parasite had died and his symptoms improved without prolonged antiparasitic therapy [6].
6. Competing narratives and likely explanations to reconcile them
The sources present two competing narratives: the public deposition and interviews in which Kennedy says a worm “ate” part of his brain (a vivid lay summary) versus private claims reported later that a doctor said it “was not a worm.” Possible reconciliations visible in the reporting include evolving medical interpretation, shorthand language in testimony, or Kennedy’s own rhetorical choices; the available reporting does not adjudicate which version is objectively correct [1] [4] [5].
7. What remains uncertain and why that matters
Key details missing from available reporting include the specific radiologic report, a named treating physician’s contemporaneous medical conclusion released publicly, and whether multiple clinicians offered different readings over time. Because those primary medical records are not cited in the pieces provided, journalists have relied on Kennedy’s testimony and later anecdotes—leaving an unresolved factual gap about whether a parasite was definitively identified or later reinterpreted [1] [4]. That gap matters because opponents and supporters have used the story politically, and medical accuracy affects public understanding of both Kennedy’s health and neuroinfectious disease risks [2] [3].
Bottom line: Major reporting documents that Kennedy has repeatedly said a parasite was found on his brain scan and that a doctor told him a worm had “eaten” part of his brain, but later accounts report he privately claimed a doctor told him it “was not a worm.” The sources show the contradiction but do not provide definitive, publicly released medical records to settle the matter [1] [4] [2].