Culture Beaker | Science News

ADVERTISEMENT

MISSION CRITICAL

Support credible science journalism.

Subscribe to Science News today.

Culture Beaker

Where science and culture mix

Rachel Ehrenberg

Culture Beaker


Culture Beaker

Pulling ‘Vaxxed’ still doesn’t retract vaccine misconceptions

picture of the outside of the Tribeca Film Festival

The Tribeca Film Festival's decision to cancel Vaxxed, a film by discredited doctor Andrew Wakefield, might fuel further mistrust among those already wary of vaccines.

Sponsor Message

The Tribeca Film Festival and its cofounder Robert De Niro came under intense fire last week for their decision to screen Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe, a film directed by disgraced gastroenterologist Andrew Wakefield. If Wakefield’s name doesn’t ring a bell, his legacy is surely familiar: his fraudulent 1998 study claiming to find a link between autism and the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine kicked off a major public health scare that’s had lasting, devastating consequences. While the purported link between autism and vaccines has been repeatedly debunked, the link lives on within the antivaccination movement. As a result of the backlash against vaccines, cases of the virtually eliminated measles are on the rise, as are outbreaks of other vaccine-preventable diseases.

Wakefield and his filmmaking colleagues’ official description of Vaxxed suggests that it sings his same tired, fear-mongering song: A whistleblower reveals a covered-up link between the MMR vaccine and autism. De Niro, who has a child with autism, initially defended the film’s screening, but after a firestorm of criticism, he changed his mind and Tribeca pulled the film from its lineup. The reversal was heralded as a win for science. If only it were that simple.

The notion that pulling the film means fewer people will buy into the vaccine-autism conspiracy theory isn’t supported by the data. Research suggests that efforts to correct errors with factual information often backfire. This is especially true when a topic is controversial or tied up with our identities, when it relates to our health, for example, or our kids.

“Once misinformation is out there about controversial issues, it is very hard to correct,” Dartmouth’s Brendan Nyhan, an expert in misperception in health care and politics, told me.

Nyhan and his colleagues have looked at the antivaccination issue through this misperception lens, and the results are distressing. A few years ago, the researchers surveyed a random sampling of parents about their attitudes toward vaccines and then showed the participants one of four kinds of information: written material from the CDC explaining the lack of evidence that the MMR vaccine causes autism; written material about the dangers of the diseases prevented by the MMR vaccine; images of children who have the diseases prevented by the MMR vaccine; or a dramatic narrative about an infant who almost died of measles. In a later round of questions, the parents were asked whether they intended to give their kids the MMR vaccine.

After seeing the CDC information explaining the lack of evidence linking autism to the MMR vaccine, slightly fewer parents agreed with the statement “some vaccines cause autism in healthy children.” But the participants who started out with the least favorable attitudes toward vaccines became even more resistant: The number intending to vaccinate their children dropped after getting the information debunking the link, Nyhan and his colleagues reported in Pediatrics. (The researchers have since found the same is true with correcting misinformation about the flu vaccine.) Moreover, Images of unvaccinated kids who were sick with diseases prevented by the vaccineactually led to an uptick in the number of people who said they thought vaccines cause autism. Likewise, the narrative about the sick baby also led to an increase in beliefs about serious side effects from the vaccine. 

Tribeca should have pulled the film, as others have noted; Vaxxed should not be confused with a serious journalistic examination of a tough subject. But hearing about the film being withdrawn will very likely lead some people who are already wary of vaccines to just doubt them further.

“Often we overestimate our ability to make decisions based on facts,” says Seth Mnookin, who explores why parents spurn vaccines in his book The Panic Virus: The True Story Behind the Vaccine-Autism Controversy. “But the reality of being human is the vast majority of our decisions are based on emotions.”

In the case of vaccines, that emotional response probably stems from many things, Mnookin says, including frustration with our lack of personalized health care, a general distrust of large corporations and of big pharma specifically, distrust that isn’t necessarily misplaced.

“‘How can you defend pharmaceutical companies?’ is a legitimate question,” says Mnookin. But equating vaccines, which have saved countless lives, with pharmaceutical companies as a whole is a huge mistake, he says; it’s an emotional response rather than one based on evidence.

Our tendency to make mistakes when it comes to emotional subjects like our children’s health suggests that we need safeguards to protect us not only from fraudsters like Wakefield, but from ourselves. The scientific community — and the media — need to change the incentives of the game, placing value on accuracy rather than flash, says Nyhan. Scientific journals should report negative results with the zeal with which they play up new and surprising findings, Mnookin and others argue. And public figures should think twice before they promote misinformation about vaccines, not after.


Editor's note: This post was updated on April 1 to correct the title of the film.

Science & Society,, Technology

Your photos reveal more than where you went on vacation

By Rachel Ehrenberg 4:40pm, July 1, 2015
By mining public databases of people’s photos, researchers can explore changing landscapes and tourist behavior.
Science & Society,, Physics

Deflategate favored foul play over science

By Rachel Ehrenberg 9:00am, June 18, 2015
Science didn’t get center stage in the rulings on whether the New England Patriots underinflated footballs during championship game against the Indianapolis Colts.
Science & Society,, Health

Attempt to shame journalists with chocolate study is shameful

By Rachel Ehrenberg 6:09pm, May 28, 2015
Journalist John Bohannon set out to expose poor media coverage of nutrition studies. In the process, he lied to his own profession and the public.
Science & Society,, Neuroscience

The Dress divided the Internet, but it’s really about subtraction

By Rachel Ehrenberg 12:49pm, May 14, 2015
People really do see different colors in the same photo of a dress, suggesting that our internal models shape color perception far more than has been recognized.
Science & Society,, Networks

Working together doesn’t always work

By Rachel Ehrenberg 12:21pm, May 7, 2015
Working as a team is a great way to gather information, but innovative solutions come best from small groups or individuals, a new study suggests.
Science & Society

Sometimes it’s best to feed the trolls

By Rachel Ehrenberg 12:43pm, April 24, 2015
There are people behind malicious comments on the Internet, and sometimes engaging with them can change their behavior, data suggest.
Science & Society,, Computing,, Language

Unbiased computer confirms media bias

By Rachel Ehrenberg 10:00am, April 17, 2015
A computer algorithm can identify a media outlet’s bias just by the quotes it chooses from political speeches, surrounding context aside.
Science & Society,, Genetics,, Health

The Angelina effect should be about knowing your cancer risk

By Rachel Ehrenberg 5:03pm, April 10, 2015
Angelina Jolie’s public message about her medical decisions related to cancer is about knowing your risks for disease, not hers.
Science & Society

NCAA tournament puts prediction strategies to the test

By Rachel Ehrenberg 8:05am, April 3, 2015
When it comes to strategies for building the most winning bracket during March Madness, all bets are off.
Science & Society,, Neuroscience

Forensic analysis finds ‘Blurred Lines’ case not so clear

By Rachel Ehrenberg 8:00am, April 3, 2015
In March, courts ruled that the song “Blurred Lines” borrowed from Marvin Gaye’s “Got to Give it Up.” But a closer look finds the songs aren’t all that alike.
  •  
Subscribe to RSS - Culture Beaker