Prior to Andrew Wakefield losing his license to practice medicine in the UK, he had been a highly credentialed scientist and physician who specialized in the research of gastrointestinal disorders. At one time recognized by the Royal College of Surgeons, he was also a highly respected academic who would periodically contribute to writing medical papers. Life was good for the family man and rugby enthusiast. Then it all came crashing down following an infamous 1998 article he co-authored, that was published in a medical journal and which brought his name to public attention and specifically to a British reporter who would turn out to be a real thorn in Wakefield's backside. Why this was is what this absorbing documentary examines, among other things.
Depending on who you listen to, what went onto become of Wakefield was either absolutely just or a gross iniquity. I'm of the latter opinion, albeit I shall try and keep some sense of objectivity here, in this review.
Arguably draconian, Wakefield's name was eventually removed from the British medical registry. With his reputation and career in the UK ruined, he and his family packed up and relocated to the US, where there the pilloried fellow worked for years at clearing his name of the accusations that had been brought against him.
I won't go too much into the specifics of the controversy other than to say that Mr. Wakefield was not against the taking of vaccines, per se. Out of compassion for his patients and the public in general, he'd merely expressed some concerns regarding the safety of the combination MMR vaccine. As a substitute for this, he recommended the taking of single vaccines, instead.
The mediagenic news story surrounding Wakefield involved a bit more than this and was greatly fueled by what many consider to have been a hatchet job on the part of the aforementioned hack, a freelance journalist by the name of Brian Deer. This pesty character was Wakefield's primary nemesis, worse than any hemorrhoid you could imagine. A contemptible nuisance if you ask me; a chap who seemingly took great delight in portraying Wakefield within the (biased) mainstream media as a one-dimensional villain.
Enter THE PATHOLOGICAL OPTIMIST, a terrific and timeless film which portrays its subject in a much more positive light than how the shameful General Medical Council, Deer, and much of the media had portrayed Wakefield, amid what some would describe as having been a kangaroo court, an utter travesty.
In this, Wakefield is seen as a three-dimensional, conscientious and caring human being, and kudos to the filmmakers for allowing him the opportunity to speak in his defense. This is something that people like Anderson Cooper, as shown here, refused to allow Wakefield to do. (Cooper, in the short clip of him interviewing Wakefield, comes across as someone not interested in seeking the truth -- that is, in letting the accused have his say -- but as close-minded and pre-judgmental, as someone with his mind already made up.)
I especially enjoyed all the behind-the-scenes, informal moments which this film includes, that work to humanize its subject and help to create a pleasantly relaxing tone. There are several scenes of Wakefield at home, chopping wood or indoors casually conversing with his wife and kids. We watch as he makes breakfast for his sons or as he drives them to rugby games.
For the most part, the film is about the admirably persevering Wakefield and the defamation lawsuit he filed against the British Medical Journal & Deer. Unable to afford the legal fees himself, we watch as Wakefield takes to the lecture circuit, appearing at speaking events, not only to tell his side of the story but to help raise funds to cover the cost of the suit. Most appreciated by Wakefield, numerous generous donors would come to his aid in support of him and this fine cause.
Here's to you, Andrew. All the best.
