Culture Wars/Current Controversies

Is there any truth to RFK Jr.’s vaccine claims?

Episode 131 with Dr. Wilson

Dr. Wilson, of Youtube’s Debunk the Funk fame, is used to taking on conspiracy theories about vaccines: their development, their rollout, their short- and long-term effects on the human body. In this episode of KK&F, he brings his insights to bear on a thorough investigation of the vaccine conspiracies that have dominated various corners of political discourse since the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of these conspiracies are now attached to a Democratic presidential candidate, giving them greater traction and visibility — is there any truth to them, from a scientific perspective? Are vaccines causing autism? Did the CDC act irresponsibly in the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines? And why do conspiracies persist? Watch below:

Are RFK Jr.’s vaccine claims totally false? As we point out in our discussion this week, while the presidential candidate hasn’t explicitly placed his anti-vaccine rhetoric at the core of his campaign, these ideas have driven his career — and are now front and center as he makes the podcast circuit. We expect certain vaccine conspiracy theories to get more airtime from their connection to a high-profile political figure. So we sat down with Dr. Wilson to get to the (scientific) heart of these conspiracies. What does the scientific evidence point to? Just as interesting: why, if proven untrue, do conspiracies persist?

Take the claim that thimerosal, a mercury compound used as a preservative in vaccines, causes childhood autism. This one is, according to Dr. Wilson, old and persistent. Yet it can be disproven on several points. First, plenty of studies have shown that the mercury present in thimerosal isn’t life-threatening. And thimerosal has been removed from all childhood vaccines, while the rate of autism diagnosis has since gone up. Dr. Wilson raises the question: Why haven’t the proponents of this claim pivoted? Why, in other words, does the conspiracy persist, despite strong evidence against it? He acknowledges, of course, that the scientific process must involve getting new data and re-evaluating old information. Still, this opens up an opportunity to think about political motivations driving polarization around matters of public health — and we think it’s an important one. We’re glad you’re joining us for this conversation. You can listen to it as a podcast episode when it’s released tomorrow on Apple Podcasts, Pandora, Spotify, and more.

Leave a Reply