When a filmmaker asked medical historian Naomi Rogers to appear in a documentary, the聽聽didn鈥檛 blink. She had done these 鈥渢alking head鈥� interviews many times before.
She assumed her comments would end up in a straightforward documentary that addressed some of the most pressing concerns of the pandemic, such as the legacy of racism in medicine and how that plays into current mistrust in some communities of color. The subject of vaccines was also mentioned, but the focus wasn鈥檛 clear to Rogers.
The director wanted something more polished than a Zoom call, so a well-outfitted camera crew arrived at Rogers鈥� home in Connecticut last fall. They showed up wearing masks and gloves. Before the interview, crew members cleaned the room thoroughly. Then they spent about an hour interviewing Rogers. She discussed her research and in particular controversial figures such as Dr. James Marion Sims, who was influential in the field of gynecology but who聽聽during the 1800s without anesthesia.
鈥淲e were talking about issues of racism and experimentation, and they seemed to be handled appropriately,鈥� Rogers recalled. At the time, there were few indications that anything was out of the ordinary 鈥� except one. During a short break, she asked who else was being interviewed for the film. The producer鈥檚 response struck Rogers as curiously vague.
鈥淭hey said, 鈥榃ell, there鈥檚 鈥榓 guy鈥� in New York, and we talked to 鈥榮omebody in New Jersey, and California,'鈥� Rogers told NPR. 鈥淚 thought it鈥檚 so odd that they wouldn鈥檛 tell me who these people were.鈥�
It wasn鈥檛 until March that Rogers would stumble upon the answer.
She received an email from a group called Children鈥檚 Health Defense 鈥� prominent in the anti-vaccine movement 鈥� promoting its new film,聽鈥淢edical Racism: The New Apartheid.鈥�
When she clicked on the link and began watching the 57-minute film, she was shocked to discover聽迟丑颈蝉听was the movie she had sat down for back in October.
鈥淚 was naive, certainly, in assuming that this was actually a documentary, which I would say it is not. I think that it is an advocacy piece for anti-vaxxers,鈥� Rogers said. 鈥淚鈥檓 still very angry. I feel that I was used.鈥�
The free online film is the latest effort by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the founder of Children鈥檚 Health Defense. (He鈥檚 a son of former U.S. Attorney General Robert 鈥淏obby鈥� Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.) With this film, Kennedy and his allies in the anti-vaccine movement聽聽about the dangers of vaccines, while aiming squarely at a specific demographic: Black Americans.
The film draws a line from the real and disturbing history of racism and atrocities in the medical field 鈥� such as the聽聽鈥� to interviews with anti-vaccine activists who warn communities of color to be suspicious of modern-day vaccines.
At one point in聽鈥淢edical Racism,鈥� viewers are warned that 鈥渋n Black communities something is very sinister鈥� and 鈥渢he same thing that happened in the 1930s聽鈥� is happening again.
There is a lengthy discussion of the聽听产别迟飞别别苍听. For example, the film references a study from the聽about the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine and autism rates as evidence that African American children are being particularly harmed,聽聽are at increased risk of autism because of vaccination.
The movie then displays a chart claiming to use that same CDC data 鈥� obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request 鈥� to make a connection between vaccinating Black children and autism risk. The findings in the chart closely resemble another study sometimes mentioned by anti-vaccine activists, but the medical journal聽聽the study, because of 鈥渦ndeclared competing interests on the part of the author鈥� and 鈥渃oncerns about the validity of the methods and statistical analysis.鈥� (That study鈥檚 author was a paid independent contractor for Kennedy鈥檚 group as of 2020 and sits聽.)
The film also聽that showed Somali Americans and other African Americans have a more robust immune response to the rubella vaccine than Caucasians and Hispanic Americans. One of those interviewed in Kennedy鈥檚 film then asks, 鈥淪o if you have that process that could be caused by vaccines, why wouldn鈥檛 there be a link between vaccines and developmental delays?鈥�
But the study鈥檚 author, leading vaccine researcher Dr. Gregory Poland, said this conjecture is not accurate.
According to a statement provided to NPR by the Mayo Clinic, the study demonstrated 鈥渉igher protective immune responses in African-American subjects with no evidence of increased vaccine side effects,鈥� and any claim of 鈥溾�榠ncreased vulnerability鈥� among African-Americans who receive the rubella vaccine is simply not supported by either this study or the science.鈥�
For her part, Rogers, the Yale professor, appears for only about 14 seconds in the film. Her quotes are accurate. But her remarks are embedded in a wider narrative that she has 鈥渆normous problems with鈥� 鈥� namely that the anti-vaccine movement is heroically engaged in a new civil rights campaign, one meant to stop experimentation on the Black community.
Rogers said the film uses many ideas she holds 鈥減assionately, like health disparities, fighting racism in health, working against discrimination, and it鈥檚 been twisted for the purposes of this anti-vax movement.鈥�
Another credible expert from mainstream medicine also appears in the film:聽, the immediate past president of the聽. The group is the largest organization representing African American physicians in the United States.
Brooks said he agreed to be in the film because he wanted to provide balance, but after seeing it he regrets doing the interview.
鈥淭he crux of the documentary is generally 鈥楧on鈥檛 get vaccinated,'鈥� Brooks told NPR in a recent interview. 鈥淭here聽颈蝉听an understandable concern in the African American community regarding vaccines 鈥� however, in the end, my position is you look past those, have an understanding of those and still get vaccinated. 鈥� That nuance was not felt or presented in the documentary.鈥�
Kennedy鈥檚 group released the film in early March, just as the covid-19 vaccine was becoming widely available to the American public.
鈥淭he film basically wants people to recognize this history that leads right into the present, and especially when they鈥檙e facing decisions about whether they should take any vaccine, including covid,鈥� said Curtis Cost, one of the film鈥檚 co-producers and a longtime anti-vaccine activist.
Cost said the film does not explicitly tell people to refuse the covid vaccine, but it 鈥済oes all the way to the present experimentations and bad things have been done by the medical establishment in America and in Africa and other parts of the world.鈥�
In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for Children鈥檚 Health Defense denied that the film is misinformation and said it contains 鈥減eer reviewed science and historical data.鈥�
But the movie is 鈥渁 classic example of the anti-vaccine industry with a highly targeted message using sophisticated marketing techniques and building alliances with affiliate organizations,鈥� said Imran Ahmed, CEO of the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate, which has聽.
鈥淭hey鈥檝e seen the opportunity to target a specifically African American audience,鈥� he said, during a particular moment of heightened national attention on racial injustices and health disparities.
Black Americans have聽聽compared with white Americans. Racial disparities in聽vaccination uptake persist聽across the United States.
While there are聽to improve access to the vaccine, media coverage has also focused heavily on historical reasons for vaccine skepticism 鈥� too much,聽聽scholars argue, when the focus should be on how Black Americans experience the impact of systemic racism in health care today 鈥� and how to fix those problems and improve trust.
鈥淲e鈥檙e in this moment where we鈥檙e having some necessary discussions about health equity,鈥� said Victor Agbafe, a medical student at the University of Michigan. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not a good thing to sort of exploit that as a means to undermine trust in the vaccine today, instead of focusing on how we can make the vaccine more accessible for all communities.鈥�
Agbafe, who helps lead his school鈥檚 Black medical student association, was surprised to get an email from Children鈥檚 Health Defense asking him to promote the movie among his peers.
When it was released, the film did not seem to gain much traction on major social media platforms such as Twitter, although tracking how often this kind of video is being shared privately can be difficult, said聽, a University of Washington researcher who studies the anti-vaccine movement online.
But Kennedy鈥檚 anti-vaccine activities during the pandemic involve more than this movie.
In February, he聽聽from Instagram for posting misinformation on vaccines, but he still has a home on Facebook and Twitter. Ahmed鈥檚 organization has labeled Kennedy one of the聽聽鈥� a group of people responsible for 65% of the shares of anti-vaccine misinformation on social media platforms.
In a recent聽聽about the film, Kennedy said those who agree with the film need to use 鈥渢he tools of advocacy that Martin Luther King Jr. talked about鈥� and promote it 鈥済uerrilla-style鈥� against the 鈥渄arkening cloud of totalitarianism.鈥�
Although more than half of American adults have gotten a covid vaccine, demand is falling fast, and polls聽聽almost one-third of adults still either want to 鈥渨ait and see鈥� or do not want to get the shot. When asked why, many say the vaccine is unsafe, based on false conspiracy theories.
鈥�I see the downstream ripple effects of disinformation every day in practice, every day in the patients鈥� lives I treat,鈥� said聽聽with the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services and co-founder of the online campaign聽, which aims to encourage trust in the covid vaccines.
鈥淲e know people have uncertainties, and we need to acknowledge that and have humble, respectful conversations, but for someone to actively subvert that trust is unconscionable,鈥� Nakhasi said.
According to the聽, the ideal strategy for stopping the spread of online misinformation is to cut it off at the source: meaning 鈥渄eplatform鈥� the most notorious spreaders of that information so they can鈥檛 gain a following on social media in the first place. But Ahmed said that all too often tech companies don鈥檛 take those steps themselves. In that case, the next best tactic is to try to 鈥渋noculate鈥� people against false and misleading claims.
鈥淵ou tell people in advance, 鈥楬ey, something terrible is happening. Be careful 鈥� they鈥檙e targeting you,'鈥� Ahmed said.
This story is from a reporting partnership between and .