Removal of Anti-Vaccine Film Triumph for Science
March 30, 2016
Over the weekend, Tribeca Film Festival co-founder and actor Robert De Niro stirred controversy by pulling a documentary from the festival’s lineup. The film in question, called “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” was removed after De Niro backtracked on his initial decision to include the film. De Niro intended for the screening to be an opportunity to discuss the implications of vaccines as they relate to diseases like autism. Since “Vaxxed” was cut from the lineup, many have taken issue with what they believe are free speech violations, with petitions calling for the film’s reinstatement, garnering the support of thousands. However, the documentary’s removal is not and should not be the free speech battleground supporters are making it out to be.
Firstly, critics should note the lacking credibility of Andrew Wakefield, one of the film’s contributors. Wakefield is infamous for authoring a now-debunked study that linked the use of vaccines to instances of autism. Not only was the information he published found to be scientifically flawed, he was also found guilty of several financial and ethical violations — including taking blood samples from children at his son’s birthday party. Wakefield’s “research” forms much of the basis for the anti-vax movement, one that most health officials agree is putting actual lives in danger. Obviously, having an unpopular opinion is not reason enough to effectively silence someone. However, Wakefield’s opinions about vaccines are not just out of the mainstream, they are actively harmful to society at large and his ideas have been discredited over and over again since their original publication in 1998.
Wakefield and his supporters still have plenty of outlets that will publish and disseminate their content, whether those outlets are established institutions like Tribeca or self-publishing services like YouTube and other streaming sites. The Tribeca Film Festival has grown into a bona fide film organization that takes pride in its prestige; it should abide by its reputation for quality. Besides, if Wakefield’s film is as groundbreaking as he makes it out to be, then pushing “Vaxxed” to streaming might be a better decision. Tribeca is not the right platform.
In summary, the decision to pull “Vaxxed” was the right one. There is no defensible reason to prop up the ravings of a discredited hack as a pillar of free speech. Advocates have more important things to do than feed the ego of a modern day doctor of doom. De Niro’s intention to include “Vaxxed” to generate discussion is admirable, but it would be fruitless to argue against what has been confirmed several times over by decades of research. Wakefield’s claims, while controversial, won’t generate any more intelligent discussion now than it has in the last 15 years.
Opinions expressed on the editorial pages are not necessarily those of WSN, and our publication of opinions is not an endorsement of them.
Email Emily Fong at [email protected].
Megan Ruprecht • Apr 10, 2016 at 9:26 pm
Kristen Cervero, A SCIENCE MAJOR, agrees with me. Additionally, I, as a PUBLIC HEALTH MAJOR, think you are simply unqualified to discount anti-vaxxers when you probably have never even taken an immunology class.
Megan Ruprecht • Apr 10, 2016 at 9:25 pm
Yeah, Emily! Wake up! Stop being a sheeple!!!
The government is using vaccines to poison us. How else do you explain the fact that most anti-vaxxers are rich! That just shows that the government is trying to kill the poor!
Seriously disappointed. Check your facts, please.
It’s called science. Learn it.
William Jefferson • Mar 30, 2016 at 10:53 pm
What Squib said, above.
But I’ll add one thing:
This is just virtue-signalling.
Virtue signaling is the popular modern habit of indicating that one has virtue merely by expressing disgust or favor for certain political ideas, cultural happenings, or even the weather.
When a liberal publishes a tirade about the perils of “anti-vaccine” advocates, without being in he field, they are virtue-signalling. They are common social justice warriors (SJWs).
End the political correctness. It’s beneath human dignity to give into false or personally unexplored assumptions just to be liked by others. Put another way, “Grow up.”
Jason • Mar 30, 2016 at 6:08 pm
the film is an exploration of the allegations of Dr. William Thompson, who is a senior vaccine researcher employed with the CDC. August 27, 2014 Thompson issued a public press release through his law firm stating that he is ardently pro-vaccine. In addition, he stated:
“My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998.
I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.”
Since than, Dr. Thompson’s co-authors- Drs. Frand DeStefano, Colleen Boyle, and Melinda Wharton, have all alleged that Thompson is lying and possibly mentally unhinged. Dr. Thompson has not backed off his claims. The conflict between the authors is a subject worthy of investigation, one would think.
Squib • Mar 30, 2016 at 2:35 pm
How did this editor form her opinion. Was it by going though all the studies herself or just mindlessly reiterating some copy that was sent to her, telling her what to say? Wow, I would just love to have the intellectual capacity to speak so authoritatively on anything without the bother of double checking the raw facts. This editor now knows, that I know how her information got spoon fed to her. Not impressed at all. A kid straight out of high school that starts from basic and questions and checks (like a journalist is supposed to do) could have done better.