US Surgeon General Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made headlines with his July 2025 opinion piece requesting the retraction of a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The study, based on an analysis of data from 1.2 million children, demonstrated that aluminum in vaccines was not linked to autoimmune, allergic, and neurodevelopmental diseases in children. Kennedy called the study a “propaganda stunt” (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/aug/14/robert-kennedy-jr-vaccine-study-retraction).
The journal’s editor, Dr. Christine Laine, rejected the retraction call and emphasized that there were no scientific irregularities in the study (https://www.thedailybeast.com/rfk-jr-slapped-down-by-medical-journal-over-vaccine-study-retraction-request/). The study’s lead author, Anders Peter Hviid, stated that most of the criticisms were reasonable methodological arguments. He explained that criticisms, such as the lack of a control group, were due to legal and ethical principles, not a lack of data due to Denmark’s high vaccination rates (https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/medical-journal-rejects-kennedys-call-for-retraction-vaccine-study-2025-08-11/).
To understand why anti-vaccine advocates (and groups perpetuating anti-science conspiracy narratives in general) persist with their claims despite such compelling scientific evidence, we’ve listed the dimensions of the phenomenon:
- Distrust and the Perception of “Big Pharma”
- Anti-vaccine advocates, citing the multi-billion dollar size of the pharmaceutical industry (Big Pharma), claim that the “profit-driven system” prioritizes profit over health.
- The global vaccine market exceeded approximately $70 billion in 2023; a massive market emerged after COVID-19. This figure easily provides fodder for conspiracy theories when there is a lack of transparency.
- Cultural and Political Identity
- Anti-vaccine sentiment often becomes not just a scientific stance, but an identity and ideological stance. Opposition to authority, the claim to protect individual freedom, and distrust of government institutions fuel this identity.
- Therefore, instead of being persuaded by scientific data, scientific evidence can be perceived as “manipulation” by authority.
- Cognitive Biases and Emotional Power
- People can prioritize a single negative anecdote (e.g., “My child developed autism symptoms after being vaccinated”) over thousands of safety data points. This is known in psychology as availability bias.
- Furthermore, fear, anxiety, and the feeling that “my child might be harmed” have a much stronger impact than abstract statistical data.
- Information Pollution and Social Media
- Thanks to echo chambers on social media, misinformation is constantly repeated and perceived as “evidence.”
- RFK Jr. Political figures like these use these echo chambers as political capital.
- Historical Factors
- Pharmaceutical company scandals in the 1970s (e.g., the thalidomide incident) created a lasting distrust of the pharmaceutical industry.
- Because most vaccines are administered under government mandate, the concept of “mandatory” triggers a backlash against authority.
In conclusion, the persistence of anti-vaccine sentiment is not solely due to a lack of scientific evidence. Economic size, historical distrust, ideological identity, emotional biases, and social media influence also need to be considered. The lack of transparency within the large vaccine industry further strengthens this foundation. While RFK Jr.’s harsh criticism of scientific studies on aluminum-containing vaccines has been dismissed as invalid by the credible scientific community due to its fundamental illogicalities, such initiatives contribute to the erosion of confidence in vaccines.
