Actor Liam Neeson has clarified his stance on vaccines after receiving numerous criticisms for his participation as a narrator in a controversial documentary that has reignited public debate on immunization and scientific misinformation.
The film, titled Plague of Corruption: 80 Years of Pharmaceutical Corruption Exposed, has sparked a chain reaction in international media and social networks due to its controversial claims about the safety of vaccines and its links to theories widely debunked by the scientific community.
The documentary is based on a book written by Kent Heckenlively and Judy Mikovits - the latter a figure publicly accused of promoting misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic - and questions various practices in the pharmaceutical sector, including mass vaccination programs, as reported by The Guardian.
The film includes interviews with personalities such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, known for his skeptical views on vaccines, and statements suggesting that Covid vaccines were "dangerous experiments."
In response to the controversy, representatives of Liam Neeson have issued a public statement emphatically denying that the actor is anti-vaccine, despite his voice accompanying the documentary narration.
The statement emphasizes: "We acknowledge that there may be corruption within the pharmaceutical industry, but that should not be confused with opposition to vaccines. Liam has never been, nor is he, anti-vaccine."
The spokespersons also highlight Neeson's humanitarian work as UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador, pointing out his longstanding support for global immunization campaigns and public health.
According to his team, the actor had no involvement in the creation or editorial decisions of the documentary, and any questionable content should be attributed to its producers.
Neeson's participation has surprised many fans and intensified the debate in media and social networks, where some users question how a vocal advocate for vaccines is associated with a project that conveys messages seen as contrary to scientific evidence.
Critics point out that, although Neeson claims not to share the film's opinions, simply lending his voice could contribute to the spread of ideas that undermine public trust in vaccines.