Americans believe in experts. We look to CPAs to complete our tax returns, lawyers to handle our disputes, plumbers to fix our pipes. So it baffles me that an astounding number of us turn to movie stars and other celebrities for health advice.

Take a recent article in Parents magazine: “Where 13 Celebrity Parents Stand on Vaccinating Their Kids.” In it, 13 successful actresses, including Alicia Silverstone, Julie Bowen, and Amanda Peet offered their opinions and advice on issues such as the safety, effectiveness, and timing of vaccines. They also shared their thoughts on vaccinating — or not vaccinating — their children.

Why do their opinions matter? They are celebrity actresses, with their own incredible talents, smarts, and savvy. But they aren’t doctors, nurses, or scientists with expertise in immunology or public health.

advertisement

What they do have is a platform, something most doctors and scientists don’t have and few will ever possess. People listen to performers with platforms.

When people hear a famous person’s personal views on family health decisions, they fall prey to the illusion that they have set foot beyond the boundary of that star’s coveted personal space. Although we may not carry cameras, we non-celebrities are paparazzi with different lenses, peering with interest into the personal habits of the rich and famous.

The vaccine article struck serious chords in the medical community, and doctors took some sharp jabs at the piece. Many physicians chimed in that the medical community couldn’t care less about a non-medical person’s views on one of the most remarkable worldwide public health successes in history. It’s enough of challenge for physicians to explain the safety and effectiveness of vaccines to patients and families, let alone having to answer the claims of movie stars. Others expressed dismay that a mainstream parenting magazine provided yet another stage to some of the most powerful anti-vaccination voices, one of whom has lately played a key role in the anti-vaccination movement.

But the magazine ended up making some changes to the article, trimming two celebrities off the list, and adding an introduction about how the magazine supports vaccines and how they find it “irksome” that some celebrities feel otherwise. Included in that group was Jenny McCarthy, perhaps the loudest voice that helped the anti-vaccination movement get to where it is today. Irksome, indeed.

It’s enough of challenge for physicians to explain the safety and effectiveness of vaccines to patients and families, let alone having to answer the claims of movie stars.

Illnesses such as whooping cough, measles, and mumps — once common and potentially deadly — were made uncommon by vaccinations. Today, though, outbreaks continue to occur in pockets of the U.S., commonly in wealthy regions where the privileged set choose not to vaccinate their children or to delay their vaccinations. Such decisions can be deadly. During this flu season, one of the worst in decades, thousands of previously healthy children and adults have died of the flu, most of whom were not vaccinated against it. At its peak in early February, the flu was responsible for 1 of every 10 deaths and on a killing spree to the tune of 4,000 Americans a week.

When celebrities give vaccines mediocre ratings, their voices are heard. That gives power to the growing number of skeptics on vaccine safety and efficacy — even against the flu shot.

The celebrity effect isn’t limited to vaccines. Celebrities write books on health and wellness, childrearing, diet and nutrition, pregnancy, mental health, and more. They roll out health product lines, organize and run health conferences, and sell ideas that are such utter nonsense it should make any reasonable person’s head spin. Most of these ideas are backed by shoddy science, or no evidence at all. Gwyneth Paltrow touts coffee enemas to “detox” the body and jade eggs inserted into a woman’s nether regions to improve colonic and sexual health. Silverstone claimed that chewing and regurgitating food was the best way to feed one’s offspring. These absurdities are elevated by each star’s platform.

True advancements such as the human genome project, precision imaging technology, targeted chemotherapy and radiation, and gene therapy are just a handful of the remarkable game changers in health care. Widespread immunization is another.

It’s a shame that the noise reverberating from celebrity platforms often distorts or drowns out dry but solid data. Thankfully, those without IMDb pages are now spreading the gospel of data, with books, television, and popular live events. Bill Nye was a nerdy high school kid, cum nerdy children’s science show guy. Now look at him. Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson is a veritable rock star.

Fortunately, the editors at Parents magazine listened and responded when called to task about touting the medical views of celebrities. I’d like to believe this signals that we are headed toward a time when scientists will again be the voice of science, and celebrities will again be the voice of celebrity, but I’m not holding my breath.

Nina Shapiro, M.D., is the director of pediatric otolaryngology and professor of head and neck surgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, and author of “Hype: A Doctor’s Guide to Medical Myths, Exaggerated Claims and Bad Advice,” to be published by St. Martin’s Press (May 2018).

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • Unfortunately, Americans do not necessarily appreciate professional expertise. Have you, by chance, read Tom Nichols’ book, The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Estsblished Knowledge and Why It Matters? Sadly, there are also health professionals who prostitute their credentials to act like or become celebrities by spreading misinformation about vaccines, food, agriculture and health. It’s the pattern of behavior with science communication that matters, whether that person is a health professional or a celebrity.

  • The primary issue here is twofold: charisma and trust. That trust is partly borne out of empathy and, put simply, most scientists are not as interesting to Joe or Jane Public. We must do better.

  • Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson is, as you note, an astrophysicist. Not an MD or a medical researcher. Yet you suggest we listen to his medical guidance. That defeats the central argument of this article.

  • The good news is that when we survey and focus groups students around celebrities and their advice or campaigns they put out, they do not tend to listen to them. In many cases, they tend to find them preachy and condescending. The key folks they say they trust for health are doctors/nurses (sometimes parents/teachers).

  • Excellent article. The truth about uniformed influences on what is important to know about health issues. The seduction of celebrity opinions on health unfounded by research can cause harm to the population at large.

  • The issue of platform is easy. Take the responsibility and talk to the right people instead of just the politicians and celebrities

A roundup of STAT’s top stories of the day in science and medicine

Privacy Policy