Tribeca Film Festival Pulls Controversial Anti-Vaccination Documentary

Robert De Niro
Jim Smeal/REX Shutterstock

In an abrupt about-face, the Tribeca Film Festival has pulled a controversial anti-vaccination documentary a day after festival co-founder Robert De Niro publicly defended the decision to show “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.”

“My intent in screening this film was to provide an opportunity for conversation around an issue that is deeply personal to me and my family,” De Niro said in a statement. “But after reviewing it over the past few days with the Tribeca Film Festival team and others from the scientific community, we do not believe it contributes to or furthers the discussion I had hoped for.”

“Vaxxed” is co-written and directed by Andrew Wakefield, a former surgeon and medical researcher who published a discredited 1998 research paper that claimed that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine was linked to autism. Wakefield was accused of professional misconduct and falsifying information in that study, and the Lancet, the journal that ran the research, retracted the piece. The British doctor has been barred from practicing medicine in the U.K.


Robert De Niro

Robert DeNiro Responds to Anti-Vaccination Movie Controversy

According to the Centers for Disease Control, there is no link between vaccination and autism. The anti-vaccination movement has lowered vaccination rates, which in turn has been linked to a recurrence of vaccine-preventible diseases such as measles and mumps.

De Niro and his wife, Grace Hightower, have an autistic child, and in a statement on Friday, the actor and director said he believed “it is critical that all of the issues surrounding the causes of autism be openly discussed and examined.”

The reaction on Twitter, Facebook and social media platforms was intense. The decision also was criticized in the creative community, with documentary filmmaker Penny Lane (“Our Nixon”) writing an open letter to the the festival saying that including “Vaxxed” threatened its credibility.

In the face of mounting outrage, De Niro said that he had become concerned about the content of the picture.

“The Festival doesn’t seek to avoid or shy away from controversy,” De Niro’s statement continues. “However, we have concerns with certain things in this film that we feel prevent us from presenting it in the Festival program. We have decided to remove it from our schedule.”

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 149

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Brian Cook says:

    Well, sorry to see Robert about face under threats from the medical and entertainment sectors. What happened to open discussions?

  2. Moviebuff says:

    Read and learn something you idiotic anti-vaccinators…get a brain and understand what you are talking about before you give medical advice that goes against every bit of independent research out there, and again all common sense. Whooping Cough ‘Nightmare’ Convinces ‘Anti-Vax’ Mom Cormit Avital To Change Her Mind – Inquisitr News

  3. Andrew C says:

    Ah yes, Wakefeild, the man who was stripped of the right to practice medicine by the BMA after conducting unauthorised, unscientific and highly immoral tests on his son and his son’s friends. Not to forget falsifying the results of his infamous “study”, which NO-ONE has been able to replicate, unsurprisingly as the results were falsified.

  4. JM says:

    The title prescribed by the pharmedia – “Controversial Anti-Vaccination Film” isn’t relevant nor does it accurately reflect the film’s content and purpose. If it were being promoted accurately, it would be called “Controversial CDC Corruption Film”.

    • Moviebuff says:

      No, it would be called, “Former doctor who lost his license for making up data for a research study while owning a company producing a new MMR vaccine for his own profit bastardizes research data fraudulently AGAIN to make a movie after his fame wanes.”

  5. ebolainfo says:

    ** Angelika Theater in NYC! **

    Vaxxed, the film about the vaccine-autism connection you can’t see…is now booked at the Angelika Film Center in New York.

    It will start screening this Friday, April 1, and go through the next Thurs.7th April 2016.

    Make up your own minds. See what mothers and families affected by MMR have to say!

    Links will be removed by, so please google “Angelika Film Center NYC”.

    Thanks. To your peace. freedom and health!

  6. Visionaerie says:

    Thanks, Robert, for caving to the medical mafia. You have just advanced the cause of health freedom to an all new level. Now let’s make the most of it and stop the ritualistic medical torture of children — and adults — and make it permanent!

  7. ebolainfo says:

    Andrew Wakefield response:

    It is our understanding that persons from an organization affiliated with the festival have made unspecified allegations against the film – claims that we were given no opportunity to challenge or redress. We were denied due process.

    We have just witnessed yet another example of the power of corporate interests censoring free speech, art, and truth.

    Tribeca’s action will not succeed in denying the world access to the truth behind the film Vaxxed.

    We are grateful to the many thousands of people who have already mobilized including doctors, scientists, educators and the autistic community.

    We will be pressing forward and sharing our plans in the very near future.


    – Andrew Wakefield (Director) and Del Bigtree (Producer)

  8. The scientist Wakefield is not opposed to vaccines. He is opposed to the schedule and the combining of vaccines without further research. He has been blackballed by the medical world but we are only now hearing his side of the story.
    As you’ll see he’s not a rabid anti scientific guy at all. I guess like in any field when powerful players get involved truth is sometimes overlooked. He in fact rejects the dichotomy between pro and anti vaccine voices. Sees this view as overly simplistic.

    It appears he has really not gotten a fair shake

  9. localherog2 says:

    Gutless. That about says it all. Gutless.

  10. Ivan says:

    If this was a movie of fiction, it should have been shown.

    But this is being presents as a non-fiction documentary.

    When the information being presented as fact and the entire premise being brought into question, the movie should have been pulled.

    This is not a situation of censoring a point of view. It is trying to maintain at least some credibility of the non-fiction documentary genre.

    • MI Dawn says:

      Exactly! Since, even in the trailer, there are comments from Thompson *proven from Brian Hooker’s book to be totally unrelated!!* linked in the movie as if they were 1 comment, making the honesty of the film questioned, it shouldn’t be shown as a documentary.

      Second: The documents are public, available for anyone’s viewing on the internet, thanks to Matt Carey. Anyone who understands statistics can see how the “Whistleblower” story is untrue from even Thompson’s point of view. Also note: Thompson NEVER declared fraud. Even in the above noted book, they never got him to say that, even though they tried hard to lead him to it.

      Show the film as fiction. It would fit just fine in the same category as “Plan 9 from Outer Space” if there is such a category for horrible fiction films.

    • localherog2 says:

      You’re as big a coward as he is. He had, not only a chance, but an obligation to show the film. Doesn’t much matter though. Word is getting out that ALL vaccines are dangerous and unnecessary and the film WILL eventually be seen.

  11. Jack Burk Goldman says:

    A tough but wise decision to pull the film. If it was documenting the full story of how this discredited doctor faked his results and lost his license to practice then it would be a good film to show.

  12. Jack says:

    Deniro doesn’t know what he is doing, never has.

  13. IT--2--IT says:

    The Hollywood franchise slum –IS— and –ALWAYS has BEEN–
    ——————————-100% INTEL RUN——————————–

  14. Meanwhile Blackfish is still playing on Netflix and gets a replay on CNN, a “documentary” that was truly just propaganda.

    • Dee Cee says:

      Apparently you do not understand what the terms documentary and propaganda mean. For clarification on the later, please watch Fox News for daily examples.

  15. Brad Smith says:

    It sounds like the government came in and said that something in the film was incorrect.

    Well big whoopty do!!

    Watch the news any night you want and something will be incorrect. It’s not like there is a law against being incorrect. (At least not yet)

    If they actually have proof right there in their hands that something is incorrect, again So What! Now if the actual film maker decides to pull it, because after being proven wrong he changes his mind, then fine. But if the film maker sticks behind his work and wants it to be shown, you show it and talk about it later, that’s how it’s supposed to work.

    Canceling it just smacks of censorship.

    • ebolainfo says:

      The reader will note [jfm] unsubstantiated assertion and abuse! Nothing to contribute but personal attacks.

      Try this on for size jkm:

      Mindset 1: Vaccines are not safe or effective. BIg Pharma profit from a dangerous intervention for which the government has indemnified them from lawsuits. Furthermore vaccines are part of an agenda to medicate the global population. GMOs are part of this agenda.
      In essence corporatism and statism are conspiring to weaken the populace for profit and control.

      Mindset2: Vaccines are effective and safe. Accept without question medical, legal, statist authority. See the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act that protects vaccine makers as a non-issue. Any questioning of authority or asertion of choice is an insult to their sensibility. Seek comfort in the mob and consensur reality.

      Dear reader, contrast this ant-vaxxer with jkm, jeff and Lynda. Decide who is the more rational despite the ad hominem attacks.

  16. Carole says:

    According to the CDC there is no link to political campaign contributors and funding of the CDC if they do not bend to the ppower of the contributors such as big pharma

  17. trutherator says:

    Search vaccine victims memorial. I met a victim of the polio vaccine. Add them to the growing list of the victims of political science. I grew up white poor. Sanders says I don’t exist. I’m also a libertarian Christian. I have met several ex-gays.

  18. Observer says:

    This was put out as a ‘documentary’.
    Now, if you put it in the ‘Fantasy’ category, then show it. Yet as a doc…? It should have been pulled.

    That’s like putting a film in the drama section that says Hillary was a good secretary of state instead of the comedy section.
    There is responsibility in masking lies as something to be taken seriously.

  19. Unbelievable the hypocrisy of these “open-minded” progressives. If the film is so obviously fraudulent and easily discredited, what’s the problem? Have a viewing and let the audience decide. What shows their fascist tendencies is that they won’t allow that. Eternal belief in democracy, collective politics, and The People is steaming pile of manure.

    • jkm says:


      • LOL!! Truth hurts eh? You’re the Truth Fuhrer who decides what’s bullshit and what isn’t (and it always conveniently happends to be against the grain of your prejudice). Sieg heil. Goebbels has kindred spirits in this comment section. Stunning.

  20. Blair Houghton says:

    1. If you don’t show it, how can it be criticized properly?
    2. Was it being shown so it could be criticized, or because the festival’s board thought it was true?
    3. Wakefield knows it’s completely dishonest for him to suggest a linkage between vaccines and autism after his original paper was decimated by the scientific community and his license was revoked. Here’s a quote from “The Vaccine-Autism Connection: A Public Health Crisis Caused by Unethical Medical Practices and Fraudulent Science” by Dennis K Flaherty in the Annals of Pharmacotherapy: “After 10 years of controversy and investigation, Dr. Wakefield was found guilty of ethical, medical, and scientific misconduct in the publication of the autism paper. Additional studies showed that the data presented were fraudulent. The alleged autism-vaccine connection is, perhaps, the most damaging medical hoax of the last 100 years.” So why would Wakefield go so far as to make a movie claiming he’s still right? What sort of massive logical fallacies must he be using in the movie to make people believe he’s still right? Is there another film to be made ripping his lies apart?

  21. rider2016 says:

    Did it ever occur to any of you that maybe it’s just a BAD FILM? This is a film festival after all – and maybe they thought the subject was interesting and then after screening it thought it was a poorly made film – nothing to do with the content?

    Just a thought.

    • “Did it ever occur to any of you that maybe it’s just a BAD FILM?”

      LOL!!!! There are tons of bad films that play at festivals every year. Since when has it been the job of festivals to screen “bad” films and who decides that? Oh, yeah, the audience is supposed to decide but of course the PC “progressive” thought fascists took that away. Because they’re so “open minded.”

  22. john says:

    Liberals whine until they get their way.

  23. Frank Critelli says:

    Censorship of the VAXXED film is proof that it was compelling, persuasive and DANGEROUS to the vaccine establishment

    If you listen to the vaccine totalitarians and corporate science zealots, every person featured in VAXXED is a total quack, fraud or nut job who spouts loony gibberish that makes no sense. If that’s true, then why is this film too dangerous for anyone to watch? If the people interviewed in the film are obviously frauds and nut jobs, then why not let the entire world see the film and be even more convinced that they’re full of bunk?

    The real answer, of course, is because VAXXED is credible, authoritative and extremely well documented. And that is precisely why the vaccine establishment considers it to be so dangerous. VAXXED is informative and even persuasive. It documents the vaccine evidence fraud and cover-up that was committed by the CDC and admitted to by Dr. William Thompson.

    • Blair Houghton says:

      “Censorship of the VAXXED film is proof that it was compelling, persuasive and DANGEROUS to the vaccine establishment.”

      No it isn’t. You’re presuming your conclusion, which is a fallacy. Reliance on fallacy is how lies like “vaccines cause autism” become widespread mistaken beliefs.

      Wakefield’s original paper was a scientific failure. It was rightly retracted and he was rightly tossed out of the medical profession. His attempt to make a visual spectacle of it won’t rehabilitate it.

    • Alex says:

      So uber lib De Niro caved to big pharma? Spare me, libs like him would love to make news showing how brave he is to showing this propaganda. A few years ago Don Imus and his looney wife went on and on about this for months, they got senators to hold hearings on it and they could prove the vaccines hurt children. This crap went away for years, now they trying to slither back into the spotlight.

  24. Sharknado99 says:

    I wonder why cases of previously controlled diseases are cropping up in the US? hmm, I can’t think of a reason why.

  25. BIG PHARMA LIES says:


    • Alex says:

      You anti-vaccination lunatics should be ashamed scaring people into NOT getting their children vaccinated! Everyone who’s got up on a soapbox and started yelling about this has ended up looking like a fool! I’m glad De Niro has yanked this phony propaganda, now go put on your tinfoil hat and watch for black helicopters.

  26. D S says:

    On appeal the paper was found to be valid. Also, Wakefield is not anti-vaccine nor did the paper conclude that vaccines cause autism. He simply said that the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines should be given separately because together they cause gastrointestinal problems which lead to other problems.

    Personally, I do believe that some vaccines cause autism and I didn’t vaccinate my kids. By the way, I’m 49 and I was never vaccinated either.

    “In 2012, Prof. Smith won an appeal against the GMC. Although he was already retired, his license to practice medicine was restored. Unlike Wakefield’s insurance, Smith’s insurance covered his expensive appeal. There was a clear ruling that the published paper and study met standards and that the GMC was at fault for the earlier ruling. The GMC has not taken the opportunity since then to restate Andrew Wakefield’s license or to clear his name.”

    • Mike Stevens says:

      DS, Wakefield has never had an appeal to the GMC, the professional medical body which pulled his license for serious professional misconduct and dishonesty.
      He had the right to appeal to the GMC to overturn their judgement, but never did so. The Medical Defence Union, Wakefield’s insurance body, confirmed that it would cover the costs of the appeal to the GMC, but not an appeal to the high court.

      One of the other doctors who had been hoodwinked into doing the unethical tests on the children (Walker Smith) also had his license revoked by the GMC, and his response was to launch a high court action to get this overruled. He successfully did so, by arguing that Wakefield was the instigator of the unethical studies and tests, and that he (Walker Smith) had only participated because he thought he was doing so in the children’s clinical interest. The court gave him the benefit of the doubt on this one, and ruled he could have his license to practice back. However, he was so “toxic” from the negative fall out of these actions that he had already retired, never to practice again.

    • “Personally, I do believe that some vaccines cause autism […].” Who cares what the hell you believe in and not? If you make such a statement in public, go ahead and prove it. Otherwise this couldnt be more irrelevant. This isnt about what you believe in rather than straight facts. Facts you also got wrong on Wakefield. He took 55.000£ from lawyers representing parents with autistic children, trying to find a link between autism and vaccines. The Lancet as well as his co-authors did not know this. After it became public, 10 of 13 authors stepped back from the paper, as well as The Lancet. It is proven, that Wakefield faked numbers and put them in wrong perspective to show that link that he was not able to prove. This is also the reason why they were at fault considering Smith, because it was Wakefield doings. There is no ruling whatsoever , stating that the paper in itself met scientific standards, because it didnt. You can ask any scientist you want, this paper is ridiculous crap. After the publication of the paper, not one, not a single one, was able to reproduce Wakefields results, how can you possibly think he was right in any way? How delusional do you have to be? Believing someone who is proved to fake, to straight out fake his results? You will probably come up with some bs about big pharma and so on. Hurts when its you moronic anti-vaccers, being proved to do exactly what you believe others are doing, doesnt it? And why? Because you werent able to scientifically prove your points at any time.

  27. BillUSA says:


    Can’t understand science, yet think nothing of telling people how to raise their kids. I wish actors and celebs would get out of the promotion business because they really don’t know what they’re talking about.

  28. ebolainfo says:

    Let us look at the credibility of W.H.O.
    According to Marcio Castro (Prof at Harvard T.H. Chan School) as of 4th march 2016
    The Zika Crisis: Latest Findings | The Forum at HSPH :
    – 5900 suspected cases
    – 640 confirmed for microcephaly
    – Only 80 had zika virus
    Zika (or dengue) found in 80 out of 640 (12.5%) cases of confirmed microcephaly. 87.5% of microcephaly cases tested negative for zika (or dengue) virus.
    The Zika test cross reacts with Dengue. Dengue will give a false positive for zika. Zika and dengue are very similar.

    Based on the non-link W.H.O declares a global concern, however WHO did NOT notice the 250,000 cases of microce[haly in the US. Did Zika cause those?
    Brazil has less than 10 thousand cases of microcephaly, global concern. US over 200 hundred thousand, not a peep.

    The same W.H.O that declared a global Swine Flu Hoax in 2009 which the CDC tried to cover up by dropping the collection of stats on swine flu. Perform a Freedom of Information request (FOI).

    The reader will forgive me, if I have serious reservations concerning the integrity of WHO and the CDC concerning health.

  29. beavincit says:

    I am so disappointed with the Tribeca Film Festival for caving to pressure and taking VAXXED off the list. Even if you disagree with it’s premise, hearing all sides of the story is necessary for informed conversation on any topic. Please reconsider.

    • Jeff says:

      In science, there is only science. No such thing as a differing opinion, only scientific evidence.

      • “In science, there is only science. No such thing as a differing opinion, only scientific evidence.”

        LOL!! Hayseed ignoramus comment of the year. Science changes all the time. The phlogiston theory of combustion was thought to be the true theory before it was refuted. Pluto was once thought to be a planet. Eating fat caused obesity, ooops, now it’s carbs. Learns some science, moron, before spouting your ignorant drivel.

    • CrimblebertFistlebars says:

      There isn’t “another side” to this. Wakefield is a fraud.

    • beavincit says:

      Apologizing for the typo which I saw only after posting.

  30. Drake says:

    No No No. Wakefield is the Galileo of our time. Autism as it is today is not what people had previously. The vaccines are
    Not the same either. The bullying by the pro-vaccine people is disgusing. There are so many parents who have a vaccinated autistic child who choose not to vaccinate their subsequent children who almost always turn out neurologically fine. If you are vaccinated then good for you. You are “immune” so worry about yourself. Us parents with
    Severely disabled children would like to tell all you vaccine know it alls to STFU. Someone out
    There knows exactly what causes autism. Too bad the scientists/doctors that do keep finding themselves dead.

    • Mike Stevens says:

      So, “Wakefield is the “Galileo” of our time”, huh?

      This logical fallacy is known as the Galileo gambit.
      As the great Carl Sagan once said: “But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.”

      Guess what?
      Wakefield is the Bozo the Clown of our time.

    • Blair Houghton says:

      Wakefield is the Lamarck of his time. Minus Lamarck’s actual contributions.

      Dead children would like to tell you anti-vax nutjobs to STFU, but they can’t, because you killed them.

    • How about you anti-vaxers stfu? Not knowing basic scientific work, not knowing even a little tiny bit of medical science, being completely ignorant in every single regard to facts. Not knowing the difference between causality and coincidence, trying to blame others for something no one can to be blamed for. That is your problem, its a mental problem on the anti-vaxxers site because you refuse to accept what cant be in your eyes, but in the end you know nothing. Nothing whatsoever that makes you eligible to make any, absolutely any medical diagnosis.

    • Jeff says:

      No, Wakefield is a proven fraud.

  31. Daniel says:

    Next year. Opening night film at Tribeca. Meet the Cowards.

  32. Daniel says:

    COWARD. De Niro should not show his face anywhere at the festival without anything but shame.

  33. Mike says:

    Funny, they let global warming lies pass but whine about something that is really important.

    • Truth Out says:

      You have to keep up with the scam. It’s now called Climate Change. Something that’s been going on for millions of years but the cabal figured out a way to tax it by demanding carbon tax.

  34. This is a Red Flag. Censorship is illegal in genuine science. You are only encouraging healthy skepticism that is at the heart of science. Maybe they are on to an inconvenient truth.

    • Blair Houghton says:

      I believe the film should be shown, if the resources aren’t needed for something with some merit.

      But it should be preceded and followed by disclaimers indicating that the film was made by people whose views of the facts have already been proved wrong by competent scientists, and that many children have died of preventable diseases because of the author’s deliberate actions to create false science.

      It should be treated like the fallacious propaganda that it is. But if the festival’s owners have decided that their festival time is better spent on other things, then that’s their decision. It isn’t censorship.

    • Clarence says:

      It’s not censorship of people speaking an opinion, it’s choosing not to propagate the lies of a man who has been found to falsify data and information when carrying out scientific studies. He can’t be trusted to provide honest facts about autism, and therefore his film has no value because it’s misleading people about something that is really important. It’s like, you wouldn’t show a film that tried to tell people drinking bleach prevents cancer, would you? If the people in the film claimed to be scientists etc? The fact is that drinking a ton of bleach probably does prevent cancer, because you’ll die before you get cancer. Wakefield’s supposed link between vaccines and autism is the same thing – not true. And I say this as an autism researcher myself.

    • Jeff says:

      All well and good, except, this is NOT censorship. Have a nice night!

  35. Momofmany says:

    This only makes me want to see the movie more! What are they hiding?

  36. george sky says:

    where is the freedom of speech. how can you make a real decision if all the facts are burned like books in a fire! Follow the big money, who benefits from no one having knowledge of a corrupt system. Wall Street, Pharma, Fossil Fuels, prisons etc…. etc

    • Sam Kail says:

      Freedom of Speech is not the issue here. The first ammendment only protects you from government censorship, and even then only if what youre saying doesnt directly harm anyone. There is numerous scientific evidence to prove that there is no link between vaccinations and autism, not only that but the idea that people would rather their children be at risk for near fatal diseases than catch autism is literally the most disgusting thing ive ever heard.

  37. Adrian Wu says:

    I’m happy. The movie is anti-intellectual nonsense.

  38. Lance Hansen says:

    WOW !!!!!
    I am amazed (not in a good way) that Robert De Niro would fold in the face of intense pressure like this !!!
    I would have told everyone to kiss my butt and that censorship nor anti 1st amendment kooks can kick rocks. I look forward to the day Andrew Wakefield’s good name is restored like his colleague who had better insurance than he did… Dr. John Walker Smith won his appeal and by default that also means Dr. Wakefield would have if he had more expensive insurance… I’ve researched the whole thing and I am still surprused there hasn’t been a huge expose by any journalists yet….
    My hope is Sharryl Atkisson or Ben Swann will let the truth be known !

  39. Ricky says:

    Measles, mumps, rubella. None of them are even as close to lethal as influenza. When i was a child in the 1960s, inoculations were dosed separately over many months. Autism was unheard of back then.

  40. ebolainfo says:

    What continues to amaze me is that these “medical” priests push the lie that health and immunity can only be obtained and mantained by their needles.
    What about good nutrition, healthy clean environments, good hygiene? Nope, their for-profit solution is the only road to health.

    My family choose to assert our personal sovereignty in deciding what medical interventions or treatments we take. We assert our right to reject vaccine interventions. It is OUR BODY.
    We accept the risk from the vaccininated as they shed their induced viruses but they have nothing to fear from us as the vaccinated are protected.

    The vaccinated vs natural immunity.

    • CrimblebertFistlebars says:

      The “natural immunity” argument might make a shred of sense if millions didn’t die every year from such diseases before vaccines were developed and made available.

      For one example, look at global measles deaths. In 2000, about 562,000 people – mostly children under the age of 5 – died from measles.

      In 2014, after a concerted vaccination campaign by the WHO, that number was 114,900 – a drop of almost 80%.

      What you seem to miss is that your “personal sovereignty” ends where others’ begins. You might “accept the risk” for yourselves, but you have NO right to force others to accept any risk – which is what you’re doing every time you go out in public when you may have been exposed to or carrying a communicable disease.

      • Rofl @TruthOut. “the whole argument of the unvaccinated threatening the vaccinated is utter rubbish. “If” vaccines worked, which they don’t then if you are vaccinated, you should be superhuman and able to withstand exposure to anything.”

        First of all, vaccines do work. Take a look at pubmed, there are ten thousands of studies proving different vaccines to work. So if youre making this call, how about you get your fat ass up and prove that. Prove that vaccines dont work, do a scientific paper that they dont work. Do that double blinded study others have done several times with the same damn outcome.

        Superhuman? Also, i didnt know there is any vaccine to prevent every disease. Why dont you show me that vaccine you claim is propagated by “big pharma” and its “bots”. Why dont you show me the claim, that vaccines are 100% perfect?

        “Recently vaccinated children a threat to public health: Evidence shows they can SPREAD disease and CAUSE outbreaks”

        Again, what is your source? Do you know why it is impossible for freshly f.e. MMR vaccinated children to cause an outbreak? Because those are dead virus in the vaccines. But again, you can tell me how a dead virus is able to reproduce, right? And as i said above, of course vaccinated children are able to spread diseases they were vaccinated to, but only if they were unresponsive to the vaccine. Your fantasy is the only thing proving anything. You can take data to any goddamn outbreak of measles and on every single one you will have a far higher percentage unvaccinated children carrying out the disease compared to previously vaccinated. Basic knowledge in math and statistics in particular should lead you to the conclusion that unvaccinated children are more at risk of catching diseases than those who are vaccinated to those diseases.

        Do me a favour, go back to f*ing school. Its hard to believe there are as uneducated people as you are.

      • Jeff says:

        If you are quoting naturalnews, you may as well be quoting your local meth head.

      • Truth Out says:

        CF: the whole argument of the unvaccinated threatening the vaccinated is utter rubbish. “If” vaccines worked, which they don’t then if you are vaccinated, you should be superhuman and able to withstand exposure to anything. In truth, it is the vaccinated that are spreading the diseases. They should be isolated from the general public.

        Recently vaccinated children a threat to public health: Evidence shows they can SPREAD disease and CAUSE outbreaks

      • ebolainfo says:

        So your fear of illness means I must poison my body for pharma’s profit?
        The irrational fear of the un-vaccinated, they might be carrying a dangerous disease, they must allow mob (statist) imposition and be poisoned for pharma shareholders.
        So the claim is : 2000 (562,000) due to measles, by 2014(114900) deaths . The reduction due to WHO measles vaccination. A claim of direct causation in the reduction of measles.
        What was the trend? Downwards or upwards? Do the reductions correlate with areas that WHO vaccinated? If areas that WHO did NOT vaccinate also showed significant reduction, how do we account for this? Has the methodology in collecting or categorising changed? This did occur with Polio, so we have to be wary?

    • Jeff says:

      Vaccinations are required. Why? Polio. That’s why.

      • Truth Out says:

        Jeff, give it up. You provide no intelligent input to this discussion whatsoever. Whatever big pharma is paying you to be an ass, they are grossly overpaying.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Wow, strawman argument. Intentional misdirection. If you have more disposable income, will you not eat better? The quality of the foods you eat will be better, furthermore you can afford more variety hence better nutrition. To suggest buying electronic goods is in any way related to health indicates your moronic thinking!

        The idiocy of the vaccine pushers is truly amazing. They wish to continually poison their body with an ever increasing schedule of vaccines. Strenghthen your inate immunity so it can ward of germs naturally.

        At what point do the poison injectors realise that the vaccine load has gone too far? 100 vaccines, 1 vaccine for every conceivable virus?

        It is indeed odd to accuse someone that is concerned with health that they work for McDonalds. Faulty logic. Being sceptical on the claim vaccines are “safe and effective” therefore I work for McDonalds.

        Vitamin c was used to deal with Polio but is NOT profitable for Big Pharma’s monopolistic tendency.
        The craven lust for profit via patented drugs overides cheaper non-patentable solutions. Seems self evident!

        You mentioned India where Polio has now been called “Flaccid paralysis”. No Polio here since they vaccinated all these kids, huh?. We have Flaccid paralysis, different disease! Here is an interesting quote:

        “In 2011 there were an extra 47500 new cases of NPAFP [non-polio acute flaccid paralysis]. Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly, the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received. Through this data was collected within the polio surveillance system, it was not investigated.”

        Did you get that? “…incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio received”

        Let me say it slowly: After teh Polio vaccines, they children displayed “non-polio acute flaccid paralysis”. It ….is….not …Polio….but ….looks….like….Polio! Got it?

      • Oh and i have to add. How the hell can better safer treatments be responsible for polio becoming extinct if pharma supresses them and most people are getting vaccinated, thus not even getting in contact with any other treatmant regarding polio prevention whatsoever? How would that even possible in your world, where pharma seems to be all mighty and able to indoctrinate millions of scientists?

      • @ebolainfo increased living standard? How does having a flat screen and a car help you not catching a disease whatsoever? Hygiene? India must be really clean nowadays then. I wonder where all those dirty slums went, Ganges is probably clean too, right? Nutrition? People are getting obese all over the world, especially in high developed countries as the US where most people do eat fast food. Are you working for McDonalds or someone like that trying to tell us theyre all heatlhy and disease preventable? Better safer treatments? Youre not even saying which ones. How can you take yourself serious in any regard? Youre ridiculous.

      • Jeff says:

        Utter garbage comments from the dishonest clown Truth Out…

      • Truth Out says:

        Ebolainfo: spot on. Plus, vaccines are seeding future disease as they will destroy the immune system. This means hundred of billions for the AMA/big pharma.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Oh Polio? That was redefined to make the numbers smaller. narrow the definitin to reduce the numbers diagnosed. Cooking the books.
        Again the logic is specious. The vaccine pushers claim that without polio vaccines, polio would be rampant, nothing about increased living statndards, hygiene, nutrition and better safer treatments that pharma supress.
        The vaccine pushers akin to crack cocaine pushers, hide the trajectory of diseases. They were trending downwards before vaccine were introduced.

  41. Ruth Deutsch says:

    What people seem to forget is that if your child is vaccinated, then being around another child who is not doesn’t harm the child that is vaccinated. The risk is with those who are not. On the other hand, because mercury and aluminum might be found in vaccines, is it worse to get the illness, like the flu, and then take appropriate measures or to have toxins in your body from the vaccine? What happened to freedom of speech? There might be something even those who are pro-vaccine need to hear in that film. They can’t determine that until they see it…

    • CrimblebertFistlebars says:

      This isn’t a freedom of speech issue. The government isn’t stopping these people from distributing their film. They aren’t owed a platform, however, and TFF has no obligation to screen their film.

      The “toxins” argument is nonsense, BTW.

  42. Robert Mark says:

    Anti-vaxxers may be sincere. But, they are idiots right up there with the Global Climate Change deniers. This hysteria over environmental heavy metal when our oceans and our air, not to mention hundreds of consumer products infants are exposed to provide a much larger threat? Stupidity. Ignorance. Magical non-thinking.

    • edgar says:

      Have you ever seen someone die after receiving the vaccine and have an anaphylactic shock?

    • Truth Out says:

      Ignorance comes from blindly believing what big pharma and the AMA state. Even when proven wrong.

      • Truth Out says:

        Yes, LMAO Malte Eising (@_BamDeBam). Shill away and keep vaccinating. Your lineage will end soon. Adios and thanks for all the non-intelligent hubris. And yes, I probably know a lifetime more about the immune system than your collective lineage.

      • LMAO Truth Out, youre being the clown to my family which includes two doctors and a pharmacist. You think you do have correct knowledge on immunology? I can barely take it, thats so amazingly ridiculous.

      • Truth Out says:

        Jeff, you obviously have no concept on how the body works and in specific, how the immune system works. If you choose to vaccinate, double down and do it. You try and force smart, logical people to do it and you will have a massive problem on your hands.

      • Jeff says:

        Choosing to not vaccinate is pretty much the same as choosing to drive drunk, not tipsy, but full on, stumbling drunk.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Why not extend us the decency of allowing us to chose not to vaccinate. Drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, jump out of aeroplanes, these are choices that are not controversial. Why does a choice to reject injecting toxins into my body garner such opposition?

  43. ebolainfo says:

    This “anti-vaxxer” is amused by the pulling the film. I wonder if the censors would be concerned if it was about flat earth, area 51, jfk or BDM. Oh no, the fiction of vaccines being safe and effective MUST NEVER questioned or brought to wider exposure.
    You can watch infantile non-sense comic characters like bat-person vs super-alien but not a documentary dealing with a real and tangible threat to health..
    When you no longer believe the medical carel, it becomes very obvious how scared they are that their con-trick will get further traction in the population.

    Here, have you vaccine shot, do you want mecury or aluminium with that?
    Vaccine pushers, contemptible, purveyoys of death and ill health for profit.

    • Lynda says:

      Because your choice made out of ignorance and ideology harms others. And you don’t even know that. People died in measles epidemics before it was wiped out. And autism was present in population before just not diagnosed. Called many other things. You are in a anti scientific info-bubble and its dangerous to both your and other children.

      • ebolainfo says:

        There were already significant (over 50%) reductions in measles before vaccines were introduced.
        If being sceptical of a poisoning for profit industy makes me un-scientific, I am honoured.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Lets us have a live internet streamed debates to a global audience on the history,efficacy and alteratives to vaccines!
        If anti-vaxxers are idiots, it should be a slam dunk.
        An open discussion is what the poisoners for profit refuse to allow.

    • Jeff says:

      Any discussion on vaccines must be done using science, not feelings and fraud. Pretty simple. This film did not belong in the documentaries section, they should resubmit it as fiction.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Yet, you offer no science, just your assertion that science is on you side. Let us see YOUR evidence, oh believer of medical fraud and deceit. Cocooned in the safety of profitable groupthink

      • timgray2013 says:

        The Center for Disease Control refutes any connection.
        Go to Google, enter the words “CDC vaccines do not cause autism”
        They have a detailed explanation why this connection is wrong. Or go to and enter the words vaccine and autism. There are lengthy explanations about the history of the rumor and the faulty connection.

      • ebolainfo says:

        Glad you mentioned CDC. The same CDC that committed fraud on the MMR vaccine and was exposed by whistleblower Dr. William Thompson.
        The same CDC that stopped counting Swine Flu cases as the numbers did not support their pandemic claim.
        The same CDC that sees the revolving door into industry. Dr. Julie Gerberding head of CDC between 2002 to 2009 leaves to head Merck’s vaccine division.
        The same CDC that gets some funding from pharma. Conflict of interest?

      • ebolainfo says:

        OK Lynda, show us the controlled study comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated populations?

      • Jeff says:

        I see the usual assortment of ignorant malcontents are out pushing their pro-disease agenda…

      • george sky says:

        tiny minds think on what they hear in the news, who pays for the news….dahhhh

      • ebolainfo says:

        You have to be amused by a deceitful industry that hides behind legal immunity from the damage that thir products DO NOT create.
        If vaccine are safe and effective why does the US have a statute protecting the vaccine pushers.
        NO science needed, just common sense.
        Are vaccines? Yes,no protection needed?
        So the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, is evidence that they know it is not safe and wish to conceal and protect themselves from lawsuits.

  44. Remme says:

    Soft-Kill, is one way to kill off a large population without people noticing. Vaccines are the vehicle to do it! Big Pharma has big dollars $ to cover up anything related to Autism. Just as the Government is in bed with the Banks, there are conflicts of interest in the CDC and Biotech companies. It’s Corporate Fascism. Listen to Alex Jones he’s no fool or Mark Dice. Anyway whatever happened to “My Body My Choice?” Can’t a person decide if they wish to be vaccinated or their children? What’s the worst that can happen a child gets sick or dies? Well Abortion KILLs children before they can be born? So why not give people the choice to “choose” what’s best for them and their families?

    Sad Bobby D caved into the Elite! If he had a son or daughter with Autism he’d feel different about it!

    • CrimblebertFistlebars says:

      If the intent of this BIG KONSPIRACY is to “soft-kill” the population with vaccines, they’re doing an absolutely *horrible* job at it.

    • b says:

      i think it’s sad that you would rather have a dead child than an autistic one

    • D. H. says:

      Clearly you did not actually read the article, Robert De Niro does have an autistic child. The entire reason he originally supported the film being in the festival was to encourage conversations about the causes of autism.

      Also, “what’s the worst that can happen a child gets sick or dies” is a major over simplification of a potential pandemic of completely preventable diseases threatening not only your child but the children of others. Take some personal responsibility for the health of those under your care. It shouldn’t need to be enforced because we should, as parents, be informed enough to make the choice to prevent unnecessary loss of life by utilizing the incredible advances in the scientific community.

      As for the rest of your comments, your tin-foil hat may need some readjustments but I’m glad to see it still fits tight enough to cut off blood circulation to your brain. We can only hope the blood circulated elsewhere prevents your from reproducing further.

    • did you even read the article? says:

      Mr De Niro has a autistic child. It’s mentioned in the article even.

    • Jeff says:

      Like all anti-vaxxers, you only see the information you want to see. Robert de Niro has an autistic child, he states this several times in links to this story.

    • rider2016 says:

      First of all, you clearly didn’t read the article – De Niro has a child with autism. Secondly, the worst that can happen is a child that is NOT vaccinated can make your child or mine die – Humility in knowing what you don’t know is a valuable attribute, I suggest you try it on for size.

  45. Mike Stevens says:

    Just to correct a slight error in your report.
    Wakefield was not just “accused of professional misconduct and falsifying information” in his study, he was found guilty of doing so.

    • Truth Out says:

      You obviously have no idea how the human body works nor it’s immune system. Educate yourself first before posting.

  46. rider2016 says:

    Are you people serious? The filmmaker has already been not only discredited but admitted to falsifying the data in his article.

    It’s been 18 years and not one legitimate scientific study has shown a causal link but I guess in the age of Facebook and Twitter, Zuckerberg and his ilk have created the illusion for people that their lay opinion should be counted in what should be left to scientists and only scientists – and that does not include those people who have betrayed their professional ethics as Wakefield did and as a result caused a calamity of resurgence in diseases that were largely extinct thanks to vaccination.

    Of course the issue should be studied but by the people who have the training and pedigree to do so – not yuppy uneducated parents who blindly want to follow a cause or position out of fear rather than science. You can’t just say you think it’s bad because it feels wrong to you – and you put the lives of other people at risk.

    It is appalling to me how entitled everyone feels to an opinion of which they have no knowledge with which to form a meaningful opinion.

    My guess is Mr. De Niro wanted the film based on the subject matter to spur discussion but upon seeing it realized it was more bunk from a disgraced physician trying to resurrect some sort of name for himself. That does not help discussion, it merely makes the discussion look pointless.

    I applaud him and Mr. Essex and the entire Tribeca Festival for having the courage to change their minds when faced with the content before them.

    • Dr D. Noble says:

      Exactly how is this Mark Zuckerberg’s fault? Zuckerberg is pro-vaccine posting photos while having his daughter vaccinated. Social media may be a medium but lay the fault of lies an mis-information where it belongs, with Wakefield and pseudo-physicians in naturopathy who advocate against science. The ‘heal the body with nature/veganistic’ garbage is to blame. There is a reason prior to modern medicine lifespans were at 35 years with less than 60% of children making it to adulthood.

      • rider2016 says:

        I agree with you about all of that but you didn’t get my Facebook/Zukerberg reference – had nothing to do with his position on vaccines if you read what I wrote and not skim – I was merely stating that the advent of social media gives every Tom, Dick and Mary the illusion that their voice matters on ALL issues even ones that they have NO business or credentials to weigh in on.

        I’m just annoyed that all the anti-vaxxers are SO sure – given that none of them are qualified and the rest of us seem to be saying let’s just stick to scientific evidence.

  47. Beverly Allor says:

    Our reaction to this news is nothing short of severe disappointment. Tribeca has caved to mainstream media bullying. This was an unexpected move considering the momentum gained after De Niro’s recent statements which seemed to back the documentary. De Niro essentially turned his back on his own word. It is difficult for me to believe that he hadn’t understood the premise of the film prior to making such a bold statement yesterday.

    • Narad says:


    • Truth Out says:

      Plenty of documentaries on the insanity of vaccines. “Bought” being a very recent one. Tribeca caved to the corporate pressure of big pharma $$$ sponsorship.

    • Jeff says:

      Sure, show this film. But is is not a fact based documentary… It is a work of fiction. Between the taint on Wakefield and the lack of real scientific evidence, this film had no business in this festival as “documentary”.

      A discussion on vaccines is a must. But that discussion must be fuelled by scientific fact, not opinions and feelings.

      This was the right decision made to protect the integrity of the festival.

  48. Jane Nashon says:

    Sorry, all your crazy vaccination conspiracies will have to continue to remain on facebook.

    • Truth Out says:

      LOL. Just linked a few scientific articles on the dangers of vaccines and the corruption tied to it and Variety pulled them. Big Pharma butters many many pieces of bread. LOL.

    • Truth Out says:

      Vaccinate your self and your spawns but never force me to do the same. The evidence is overwhelming that vaccines are dangerous.

  49. Agreed. Not sure who got to DeNiro, but there’s plenty of information contrary to the CDC and Medical Establishment narrative of “no link between vaccines and autism”. How can the artistic community silence a dissenting viewpoint?

    • I agree with you 100%! I was sorry that someone (?big pharma?) “got” to De Niro! He has his reasons for “caving”, but I’m still sorry that he didn’t stand up to those evil or just ignorant (and greedy) forces!

    • Truth Out says:

      Utter nonsense.

    • Jeff says:

      And yet, there is no actual scientific evidence. Only a smattering of opinion.

    • Patrick says:

      Because there is no scientific evidence vaccines cause autism. None. Zip. The “evidence” for the link is for people who wear beanies with propellers.

      • Truth Out says:

        Jeff: Bugger off now you pharma bot.

      • Jeff says:

        Quoting naturalnews for health discussions is akin to linking playboy… Difference is, you might actually find scientifically based facts in playboy.

      • Truth Out says:

        Merck senior management tried to pay off its own vaccine scientists to remain silent about scientific fraud

      • rider2016 says:

        Charlie, you are demonstrating my point exactly, which is that as a lay person, you are NOT equipped to review a study and decide it’s validity and neither am I for that matter.

        Both of my siblings and other family members are doctors and often as a lay person who has grown up around medicine, I will ready a study and relay that as fact to one of them only to be shown my faulty reasoning by them walking me through their methods as physicians of how to understand the limitations of studies based on how they are conducted and the other technical variables that we do not know by reading through a dense study BECAUSE WE DON’T HAVE MEDICAL DEGREES.

        That’s what physicians and scientists in that field are there to do for us as the general public is to review and judge the validity and scope of studies through their educated lens – their specific educated lens.

        If anyone could do what you are suggesting competently – then why even have medical school or scientific degrees – hell charlie can muddle through it, why not trust him with your life? Seriously, the level of hubris is remarkable. Leave the judgement to the quorum of experts.

      • charlie says:

        Where, exactly, do you get your info? Because I can link to a VERY recent study that shows a pre-disposition triggered by what is described as ‘40% environmental’ causes – and if you don’t think injecting a kid with those vaccines couldn’t be described as ‘environmental’ then you don’t know. The study is extremely dense and difficult to read but I’m crazy and I managed it. I don’t think vaccines should stop, just spread the doses and find out if there’s a way to screen for the kids that will react adversely. The vitriol I see on this issue comes from two places: Big Pharma, or people who vaccinated their kids and know inside they dodged a bullet. I have no choice but to accept the fact that my kid likely took one for the team and that’s fine – the blunt, angry denials fly in the face of what we really need – acceptance and more research.

      • rider2016 says:

        Charlie, you make a very valid point, however members of the scientific community worldwide have been looking into this for nearly 2 decades and it is hard to believe that if there were any legitimate findings existing that they would all be suppressed around the world.

        On the positive side of the internet connecting us – there is now a major network of scientists, physicians and researchers collaborating across countries – I hope that this will allow the truth to come out. I’m not suggesting it’s not possible, but we must go on the facts as they become known to us and if there is truly big pharma stopping us getting facts well then that’s the thing to reveal, not bunk that hasn’t stood the scrutiny of the scientific community.

      • charlie says:

        That’s right because there must NOT be any. You likely understand the liability issues here. Not so difficult to control, major studies are hard to get funded.

      • rider2016 says:

        Patrick, you are so right. It’s amazing to me that people think evidence exists because someone else says it exists. It’s like a preacher reviewing a climate scientists work and stating there is no proof. Not one expert in the field has found any link – and if you think all that nonsense on the web is evidence that is being hidden from you – that’s scary, that’s the kind of thinking that led to Jonestown and Heaven’s Gate…it’s a slippery slope who you choose to believe on faith instead of scientific fact as defined by SCIENTISTS!!!!

  50. Freedoma says:

    Wow. Caved to big pharma. Sad and pathetic.

More Film News from Variety