That isn't really a literal comparison being made -- it's maximally exaggerated, to emphasize the main point: that the negative thing being conceded vastly outweighs the positive thing being lauded.
"OK, yeah, our buddy Louis does beat his wife, and totally deserved to get arrested last weekend, don't get me wrong -- but man does that guy make a delicious lasagna!"
The piece of shit known as RFK isn't just your normal crackpot science-denier uncle. I mean, he actually is very much like that in many ways, but because of the famous family name he banks on, and perhaps the credulous idiotism of our modern media landscape and/or celebrity-worship cultural defect, he is responsible for enormous suffering, including the deaths of many children. It's hard to put a precise number on, because the parents are truly responsible, and he only convinced them not to vaccinate -- but if bringing back measles to kill children was a sport, he'd be the Joe Rogan color commentator for it.
He's repudiated by his family, and those with at least a rudimentary high school understanding of science, for a reason.
So, yes, toxic chemicals in our environment or in consumer products is a problem, and one that the US political system isn't doing well addressing. But even if Jeffrey Dahmer agrees with you, and can pithily and eloquently summarize the risks -- you still need to find a different spokesperson.
