Too True

"It's hard to understand reporters who are so willing to risk their reputations by ardently defending the use of toxic mercury in vaccines when the science simply isn't there." -- Anne Dachel -0- As people attack RFK Jr.'s new book...

How Mercury Triggered The Age of Autism

Autism Public Service Announcement

Canary Party Vaccine Court Video

A Glimpse into Autism

Meet Our Advertisers


Olmsted's Original UPI Series

  • The Age of Autism Tag

« Petition: Closing Loopholes as CA Public Health Authorities Claim Power to Forcibly Medicate in Emergency | Main | Dachel Media Review: NYT Says NO to ADD »

"Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente

ReissBy Christina Waldman

In the past weeks, Prof Dorit Reiss of Hastings law school in San Francisco has been bombarding the blogs with many hundreds of comments in relation Katie Couric’s broadcast on HPV vaccine - likely in excess of a thousand.

(
KatieCouric.com: Rosie Perez

Katie Couric.com: What Are Your Thoughts on Gardasil

KatieCouric.com: Conversation Continued

HuffPo: Furthering Conversation)

So many, in fact, that it is hard to imagine how it could not interfere with her normal professional routine. Whether or not Reiss has been able to perform her normal professional tasks during this period there is an issue of whether her advocacy may be conflicted by the sponsorship and institutional affiliations of her employer, examined here by Christina Waldman.

In an exchange a few days ago (Dec 8) between University of California (UC) Hastings Associate Law Professor Dorit Reiss and "Vince Brown" on KatieCouric.com,  Brown accuses Reiss of being “paid to post” in favor of vaccines.  Reiss  replies:  "Not really.  My lawschool [sic] would pay me the same salary whether or not I post here."  Brown persisted, and Reiss confirmed, “I am sorry you had trouble understanding my comment. No, no one is paying me to post here.”

Be that as it may, the institutional activities of Hastings have latterly become bound up in partnerships between UCSF/UC Hastings and Kaiser Permanente, the largest managed health care organization in the US , the head office of which is just across San Francisco bay in Oakland.

According to Wiki:

“UCSF is administered separately from Hastings College of Law, another UC institution located in San Francisco. In recent years, UCSF and UC Hastings have increased their collaboration, including the formation of the UCSF/Hastings Consortium on Law, Science, and Health Policy.”

The Consortium “offers impressive opportunities” for students in education, research, and clinical studies, including internships/externships with Kaiser Permanente and others.   (8/28/13 press release).  (Paper by Consortium members, “Price Transparency in the Health Care Market)

A November 14, 2013 press release announced a new center for the study of uses for the human genome, a joint endeavor of Kaiser Permanente, UC San Francisco and UC Hastings College of Law.  To this end, the National Human Genome Research Institute provided $778,000.

One of the papers most frequently cited by Reiss in her defense of HPV and Gardasil vaccine was conducted by Kaiser Permanente or behalf of Merck:

Author Affiliations: Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center, Oakland (Dr Klein, Messrs Hansen, Emery, and Lewis, and Ms Deosaransingh), Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Pasadena (Drs Chao and Jacobsen, Messrs Slezak and Takhar, and Ms Sy), Department of Pediatrics, South Bay Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Los Angeles (Dr Ackerson), and Pharmacy Analytical Service, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, Downey (Dr Cheetham); and Department of Epidemiology, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Whitehouse Station, New Jersey(Drs Velicer and Liaw)….

Financial Disclosure: This study was funded by Merck & Co. Dr Klein receives research support from Merck & Co, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, Novartis, and sanofipasteur for unrelated studies. Dr Jacobsen and Mr Slezak received research funding from Merck & Co for another study related to HPV4. Mr Slezak served as an unpaid consultant to Merck & Co. Dr Chao received research funding from Merck&Co, Amgen, and Pfizer for unrelated studies. Drs Velicer and Liaw are employees of Merck & Co.

Role of the Sponsor: The study sponsor, Merck & Co, provided substantial input into the study design and analytic plan. In collaboration with the Kaiser Study Team, the sponsor reviewed data analyses and helped draft and revise the manuscript. The Kaiser Study Team investigators made final decisions regarding manuscript edits.

Kaiser Permanente is a self-proclaimed “national leader in vaccine research” through its Vaccine Center Study and Division of Research, including much Gardasil-related research. 

The CDC and Kaiser Permanente work together closely on a multitude of projects. (Morgellons and

Diabetes.)

Money flows from the CDC Foundation to Kaiser, and also from Kaiser back to the CDC Foundation.   

 

Raymond J. Baxter, Kaiser Permanent’s senior VP for community benefit, research, and health policy, is also on the board of the CDC Foundation. 

Here are 15 “studies and working groups being conducted as part of the CDC-funded Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Network.”  These include studies on febrile seizures, on the role of immunization with influenza or hepatitis b vaccines in children’s Bell’s Palsy, and others

Evidently, there is a network of interests here which endangers public accountability. Dorit Reiss’s employer is not simply a school of law; it is affiliated to major promoters of the vaccine program and has a strategic role in developing health policy. Meanwhile Reiss, herself, seems to have great difficulty in perceiving any kind of conflict. In a 2011 paper Reiss advocated the benefits of agency capture :

Observers of the administrative state warn against “capture” of administrative agencies and lament its disastrous effects. This article suggests that the term “capture”, applied to a close relationship between industry and regulator, is not useful – by stigmatizing that relationship, judging it as problematic from the start, it hides its potential benefits. The literature on “capture” highlights its negative results – lax enforcement of regulation; weak regulations; illicit benefits going to industry. However, this picture is incomplete and in substantial tension with another current strand of literature which encourages collaboration between industry and regulator. The collaboration literature draws on the fact that industry input into the regulatory process has important benefits for the regulatory state. Industry usually has information no one else has, and has more incentive to give that information to a friendly regulator. Furthermore, working with industry can substantially improve the impact of regulation; voluntary compliance is cheaper and can be more effective than enforced compliance, and industry can help regulators minimize negative unintended consequences. This paper suggests that instead of engaging in name-calling, we should focus on identifying when a close industry-regulator relationship will work in the public interest, and when it is likely to undermine it. That is an empirical question.

It is an interesting question where--in due concern about the dissolution of the proper boundaries between state, institutions and business--“name-calling” is an issue, rather than for instance transparency.  Could it be that developments in her own institution have given rise to the need for justificatory representations?

Although Reiss may claim to act simply as a concerned parent the UC Hastings website features and publishes her vaccine advocacy activities linking to articles on other sites.

http://hws.uchastings.edu/news/articles/2013/06/reiss-vaccination-liability.php

http://www.uchastings.edu/news/articles/2013/09/reiss-vaccine-facts.php  (9/12/2013)

http://hws.uchastings.edu/news/articles/2013/06/reiss-vaccination-liability.php

A profile on the UC Hastings website states:

Professor Dorit Rubinstein Reiss is quickly becoming the nation’s foremost legal expert about the potential for tort liability for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. In addition to running her own blog on the subject, Before Vaccines, Professor Reiss has penned multiple Op-Eds and articles about the dangers of choosing not to vaccinate. Her latest piece in the Recorder discusses California’s new bill AB2109, which goes into effect January 2014, and changes the requirements for parents who want to utilize California's personal belief exemption and send their children to school without the required childhood immunizations.

Despite the many protestations, notably from Karen Ernst of Voices for Vaccines for which Reiss is a “parent advisor”  she only seems to claim amateur status when it suits her.

Christina Waldman is a New York attorney and mom who shares Dr. Andrew Wakefield's concern for vaccine safety as a priority in public health. She is concerned about the health of her future grandchildren, who will be expected to receive many more vaccines than her own children did 30 years ago

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Thanks CIA Parker;
It takes a lot of work to do all this, and stand our ground. You did great on Mother Earth News.

Twyla and John Stone as always does a great job too.

Linda, maybe you could email me at ciaparker2@gmail.com
I think I have a good idea as to the answer to your question.

Thanks, Kelly, people don't realize that the reason vaccines (sometimes) give protection for many years is that the adjuvants in them (aluminum etc.) are so irritating to the immune system that it maintains an abnormal inflammatory state indefinitely to make the immune system continue to pay attention to the weakened or killed pathogens and continue to crank out antibodies to them. Most of the chronic diseases from which so many people suffer now involve chronic inflammation, from the vaccines just doing what they were designed to do.

Speaking of what scientists don't know:

Polio-Like Illness Paralyzes 5 Kids in California

"“He had normal immunity to polio and we knew it couldn’t be polio,” she said."

http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/polio-illness-paralyzes-5-kids-california-n34981

The article directed at the American public briefly mentions that "similar outbreaks have been reported in children in Asia and Australia". What they don't tell the American public, is that in Asia there is a name for it - non-polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis (NPAFP), and in India alone, there have been "53,563 cases...in the last 13 months". Mustn't alarm the American public with the truth or facts.

http://www.mapsofindia.com/my-india/india/sharp-rise-in-non-polio-acute-flaccid-paralysis-after-polio-free-status

We need to find out who is paying her and how much.

Cia,
Dorit is busted. She said, "Vaccines are very well understood by immunologists."
Then why does Krummel (a vaccine researcher, UCSF) say:
"The discovery is important, Krummel said, because it sheds light on an aspect of medicine that has long been obscure: how vaccines work. “We know that they are effective for years after a vaccination, but we don’t know why. It seems that T-cell aggregation is a profound part of the reason.”
In fact just google up "'but we don't know why', vaccines" and you will see how much it is they "know" about vaccines.
I don't think anybody is impressed with her politeness, she is an obvous paid troll.

Liquidambar,
Lil$$$ (I cannot bring myself to besmirch the word) told me several months ago that sheesh, it was just a kid that got autism, what's the big deal? Sometimes I think about her son, and wonder what she felt about her painful experiences with his disability. And I often think about what they're like with their families and their friends. I wish I knew.

Thank you, everyone, for your kind words. And Liquidambar, I just said exactly what you said on the Mother Earth News article about the US maps showing vaccine exemptions, what states it's easy to get an exemption in, etc. DR had been invited today to come in and take me on. She said she knew that what she said hurt me, I said that nothing she said hurt me, I knew she was just rolling out the vaccine-defense spiel required by her job.
Check out Shot of Prevention. Dorit is posting one part a week of a five-part series on why parents should be sued if they don't vax, and how religious exemptions are a crock. This is the latest strategy dreamed up by BP, to scare vaccine-hesitant parents with the thought of losing everything they have in a lawsuit if they don't vax. Fear of chickenpox and measles diminishing? Let's scare them with the thought of losing their house and everything they've got if they don't do what we tell them to. Vaccines as the 21st century indulgence, you gotta pay for them if you want to live. This week is the second part, on how children can sue their parents for not vaxing them when they come of age, or if they are placed in foster care the foster parents or the state can and should be allowed to sue.
I said the other day to a really nasty guy on the Mother Earth (or is it Mother Jones?) article to please continue insulting vaccine-damaged parents, he was only pushing people into my corner with his nastiness.

CIA Parker;
Just remember - you are not talking to Dorit - you are not informing, convincing, changing the mind of Dorit -- because it is her job and she is being paid. You are talking to others - who have taken the time to look at this issue.

These readers were not impressed by Lying Lady -- Lady hmmm, I thought that meant grace, manners, sensitivity. Well at any rate, Lying Lady was there to bully parents that had witnessed vaccine reaction in their children so they would not post. However: that approach was turning off people that were just were looking, plus making parents of vaccine injured children do just the opposite - got them mad (miscalculated just had angry we are over our children which proves they have no clue how bad they had hurt our hearts. Thus; Enter Dorit a new approach.

If there is any way to get under her skin and make the fake facade fall off for a bit -- you have done a service to man kind.
Good job! Cia Parker!

TaxieMom;
It IS coming to that.
First the mention of getting rid of medical junk law suits by President Bush. I think he is a good man; it is just that some one had his ears, which proves to me that there are tons of people working behind the scenes on his.

A huge big health care bill was passed next and President Obama has talks behind close doors to the pharma company. Not only that but the Republican party was completely shut out on the whole thing

I don't know about you all; but our health insurance is our most expensive item -- but I am sure the electricity is starting to squeeze out the rest of what we have.

So the Republicans are talking about how we can lower health care cost and those medical junk law suits again.

I sense a wind from the east coming-
Paul Proffit's bravado is wavering
Media is reporting more on environmental causation of autism
Chili is fighting
Katie Couric did get the Gardasil piece out
Critical mass is achieved.
Dorit will be one of the old bats swept up, umbrella and all.

Taximom,

You are 100% correct about the yellow stars.

"Malicious lying monster" doesn't even begin to describe Dorit Reiss.

See her recent comment here:

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/02/20/kids-vaccines-spotlight-state-capitol/#comments

Peggy Thatcher Benjamin Ashraf • 2 days ago
I agree something should be done. But this bill allows parents to just as easily avoid vaccination (and the education) by simply using the religious exemption.
2 • Reply•Share ›

Taximom5 Peggy Thatcher • 14 hours ago
So, when parents don't want an invasive medical procedure for their healthy child, you think the government should force them to declare a RELIGIOUS objection?

That's horrifying on so many levels. What next? Do you want non-vaccinated children to wear yellow stars?
1 • Reply•Share ›

Dorit Reiss Taximom5 • 13 hours ago
I agree, states should not offer a religious exemption, parents should not be allowed to use insincere religious objection to avoid protecting children against disease. All religious exemptions should be abolished.
**************************************

She wants to abolish all religious exemptions to a mandated medical procedure for healthy infants? That finalizes not ot only forced vaccinations, but also legalizes the possibility of forced circumcisions, clitorodectomies, lobotomies, hysterectomies, abortions, pregnancies, sterilizations, --anything the government decides is for "the Greater Good."

Cia,

Actually one of the things which is interesting is that the manufacturers' product information warns about encephalitis and CDC do not. Fundamental to the deception is that the health officials lie while the manufacturers cover themselves. This is not informed consent.

Particularly for Dorit Reiss it is not much of an excuse if the manufacturers are covering themselves: that is the whole point is it not?

John

I'm sorry that you had to go through that, Cia. It's bad enough what happened to your daughter and all that you go through every day to recover her without having to deal with that malicious lying monster.

Dorit just said here:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/30/the-real-reason-pediatricians-want-you-to-vaccinate-your-kids.html#url=/articles/2014/01/30/the-real-reason-pediatricians-want-you-to-vaccinate-your-kids.html

that the encephalitis is not a listed reaction to the hep-B vaccine. I got a post up this morning with links to two package inserts, Engerix and Recombivax, with encephalitis on their lists of possible side effects. Of course they're going to say that the side effects listed there are just for legal purposes to shield them from lawsuit (I thought they already were), that in reality it had never, ever caused encephalitis. I had a comment up this morning about Judy Converse having had her son react just the way my daughter did, and they couldn't even get a doctor to look at him during his encephalitic screaming. And yet, regardless of the medical corruption and negligence and failure to diagnose his encephalitis, Congress invited her to testify to give her compelling account of severe damage caused by the encephalitis triggered by the hep-B vaccine. I said that vaccine encephalitis could present with symptoms like the prolonged, inconsolable screaming of my daughter, or "just" excessive somnolence or blank staring episodes. And then the parents are mystified to explain it when the child is later diagnosed with autism etc. But now it's no longer there, the editors of the Daily Beast took it down. The editors of the Mother Earth News have taken down several of my comments, including this morning citations of studies proving that the pertussis vaccine causes SIDS. It's hard to see how this stunning number of supposedly educted, decent journalists are going to face up to their crimes in collaborating with the enemy and prolonging this situation of doctors knowingly crippling millions of people for life. All they have to do is look up the citations to see that they are true.

DoritReiss 2 days ago
@ciaparker No doctor has diagnosed your daughter with encephalitis. Your belief that she has encephalitis is not enough: with all due respect, that's not a medical diagnosis. Encephalitis is a medical emergency, and if she had it, you'd see more than crying - and you yourself mention no immediate problems in the year and more until the autism diagnosis. Encephalitis is not a listed adverse reaction to the Hepatitis B vaccine, either.
Vaccines do not cause autism or MS, studies show. They are very safe. What they do do is prevent dangerous diseases. You can argue whether it's appropriate for a doctor to refuse service to those who do not vaccinate - but you should do that based on accurate facts. Not anti-vaccine misinformation.

@DoritReiss @ciaparker Some Hep B inserts, which both list encephalitis as a possible side effect of the vaccine.

http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/r/recombivax_hb/recombivax_pi.pdf

http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_engerixb.pdf

Sarah W.
She just thinks she don't have a dog in this fight.
I feel like one of the advertisements for Direct TV
Autism is just one of the many different outcomes from vaccine injuries.

Regarding Dorit Reiss, I think it is pretty brazen for a mother to chastise and threaten to sue other mothers who witnessed their own children regress after getting multiple vaccines. Talk about hutzpah. She should count her lucky stars her child is healthy and not dealing with a debilitating, chronic neurological condition triggered by vaccines. She doesn't even have a dog in the fight so to speak so why is she involved in this issue at all? Maybe honing her debating skills. I see her as overly analytical and emotionally disconnected and someone who has to be right even if she is dead wrong.

Have fun with this article found in my smaller book,"The Road Too Often Traveled, A Collection of Articles on …"http://holisticremediesnews.com/3859/researchers-release-the-profile-of-a-vaccine-internet-troll/

Here is Reiss instructing her group of fake pharma "grassroots" activists as to how she will plan to sue parents who do not vaccinate. https://www.dropbox.com/s/tiz2ulxptruszmi/Vaccines%20and%20the%20Law-%20Sept%2018%2C%202013.mp3

Jpower,
I don't think she's lying about having a child: she has a number of videos of her three-year old son Daniel on Youtube. He plays ball with his dad, sings in Hebrew, and plays with their cat in some of them. He's a beautiful, precocious, charming child, and I only hope that he will not be damaged by all the recommended vaccines she says she is getting for him.

It would be interesting to see an infographic with vax ties like Cornucopia did for the organic food sector: http://www.cornucopia.org/who-owns-organic/

It's days like these I wish I'd known to get a screen-shot. When Gov. Perry announced his decision to include the "cancer prevention vaccine" my first search was the American Cancer Society to see what they stated regarding the cause of cervical cancer. Their website stated: "The cause of cervical cancer is unknown. Some studies suggest an association between chronic pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and others indicate possible associations with venereal disease."
No mention of "which" VD's, but within days after the media storm began, those statements were removed and replaced with "associated with a number of strains of genital herpes."

I was curious to see what the usual age for cervical cancer is. Went to WebMD and guess what? They don't say, at least on the summary page for cervical cancer, I imagine because they don't want to make it less threatening to young girls and women and their parents. They also make the treatment for cervical cancer as frightening as they can make it, listing chemo, radiation and total hysterectomy before later adding that if caught very early maybe a hysterectomy won't won't be necessary. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/cervical-cancer/cervical-cancer-topic-overview

There's another more detailed area where they say the vaccine protects for 5 years (as Dr. Harper said):
"The vaccine protects against the four types of HPV for at least 5 years. Studies are under way to see how long the vaccine will last and if a booster shot is needed after 5 years.1 A booster shot is another dose of the vaccine given after the first series of shots."

http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/should-my-daughter-get-the-hpv-vaccine#bo1048

Ms Reiss lies about having children so she can "relate" to parents with vaccine concerns. Ms Reiss' beliefs in the vaccine-machine should be taken for what they are.

Bayereamom,
I remember her from Dr. Sears' blog, too, as well as Caterina, who also interfered every single day. The two of them would answer the questions as soon as they went up, and often long before Dr. Sears got there, with their pro-vax message. Of course his message was basically pro-vax too, but they just did it to bring his site down. Proffit wrote a horrible hit article on Dr. Sears' book etc., which Dr. Sears rebutted, I don't know how much of an influence that had. It was a shame, I enjoyed reading his articles and the questions on his site The Vaccine Book.

There is a new episode of Katie Couric's HPV vaccine series. I am not sure when it went up; does anyone know? The newest one has Dr. Ann Shugat (sp?) a top CDC official talking about "why it is important to get the HPV vaccine." This doctor stated that there were over 40 strains of HPV. However, in Dr. Christiane Northrup's book, "Women's Bodies, Women's Wisdom," she writes that there are over 100 strains of HPV known, and about 40 that can be sexually transmitted. At any given time, at least 50% of the normal adult population and 40% of children are estimated to show evidence of HPV infection, she says. Her book's discussion of HPV makes sense to me. HPV is largely harmless and clears on its own, unless other immune system risk factors are present. We know cervical cancer is a disease of older women, yet the FDA refused to license Gardasil for older women because it failed to show effectiveness in them. There are so many issues with this vaccine.

There was no countering opinion presented on this episode. So, we have heard the government's official position on Katie's show. I suppose our tax money was used to pay for the PR spot; free advertising for Merck. But were the federal government's financial interests in this vaccine disclosed?

Posted by: Christina Waldman |

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
@AgeofAutism Tweets

follow me on Twitter
Recent Comments

Vaccine Information on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
BShapiro on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
Bayareamom on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
John Stone on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
Carol on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
ASD kids are lucky to have one job on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastings College of Law and Kaiser Permanente
cia parker on "Not Paid To Post?" Dorit Rubinstein Reiss, UC Hastin

Yes, I agree the sheer volume of posts is remarkable.
She seems to be an example of a PAO gone wrong- Patient Advocate Organization, as described in the symposium here
Item 5
http://www.ethics.harvard.edu/lab/featured/325-jlme-symposium

As a taxpayer in California, I want to know if she's posting on the job and using state resources to voice her personal opinions online. If so, she should be fired.

Like other comments, I do have to wonder how she manages to post around-the-clock. According to sources online, she lives in Fremont, at least a 48-minute commute from work each way. If she does indeed have children and a job teaching law at a state-funded University, and still finds the time to post constantly in support of the vaccine industry, something is indeed fishy.

@ASD Mom:

"Science Mom" rings a bell. I used to post at a Babycenter.com vaccine debate forum. Guess who STILL posts over there to this day? Yeppers. Science Mom.

I don't even think she's a U.S. citizen; she's Canadian, I believe, but don't quote me. Claims to have an academic background in science and of course, is rabidly pro-vaccine.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention. Babycenter.com is owned by Johnson & Johnson...

Science Mom also contributed to the demise of Dr. Sears' Q&A forum re: vaccines. I believe, at least in part, that he had to close down that forum because of Science Mom's incessant intrusions.

Of course, when queried, SM would vehemently deny she had any sort of big pharma connections and would accuse those of us of whom had those suspicions, that we were some sort of conspiracy theorists.

Carol,

Yes, and in fact the whole genetics fallacy was started by the tobacco industry who wanted scapegoat genes for lung cancer etc

http://www.independentsciencenews.org/science-media/science-and-social-control-political-paralysis-and-the-genetics-agenda/

We know, or most of us do, that the tobacco industry used to employ academics and scientists who were masquerading as disinterested parties just following logic and facts. Because other industries adopted tobacco's playbook, it's safe to assume that some percentage of vaccine apologists are ringers. But they're not going to tell us who they are now, are they? The public has to figure that out using the available information.

It’s only natural to assume that if someone is posting a plethora of comments all over the internet whilst at work, they either have a real shitty work ethic or it is part of their job.

Having a post/comment/blog article counter would be fascinating but I think what is really going to cause people to go “hmmmm” and question her authority is a compilation of “Shite Dorit says”.

I’m happy to start off. It’s from a blog that doesn’t allow comments attractively allowing Dorit and her fingers some down time. IIRC, one of the founders of the blog was “Science Mom”: A MOM who believes in SCIENCE, people!

Dorit Reiss Quote:

“For my children’s best interests, I need to follow the data. I don’t want my child to become a cancer statistic.”

From: The Costs of the Fight Against the HPV Vaccine
http://momswhovax.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-costs-of-fight-against-hpv-vaccine.html

Dorit should have started with the package insert. (And you can replace Gardasil with DTaP, MMR and all the other vaccines regarding carcinogenicity.)

“GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.”
http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil/gardasil_pi.pdf

Another example of Dorit's dishonesty. On a My Fox Austin story on vaccines in August, Dorit posted these three examples as proof that the vax/unvax study has already been done, and that it shows that vaccines do not cause autism.

"At least two studies compared children according to the rates of vaccines they receive. This study also included completely unvaccinated children: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/6/1134.abstract; and this one included children with very low levels of vaccination: http://jpeds.com/webfiles/images/journals/ympd/JPEDSDeStefano.pdf. No differences were found. This study addressed immunized and nonimmunized siblings of children with autism: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23045216 and concluded: "The rates of autism spectrum disorder diagnosis did not differ between immunized and nonimmunized younger sib groups, although small sample size limits interpretability of this result."
Given the work already done, if you want more retrospective studies, I think you need to make a case why it is worth investing valuable dollars in this instead of other things."

My detailed rebuttal of her claims has been taken down, but there are still rebuttals by Inside Vaccines and others which explain why these studies show nothing of the kind. In one there was only one completely unvaxed child. One showed that children who delayed receipt of vaccines did not have different rates of autism than ones who got them on time. Big deal. One was a small sibling study, less than a hundred kids total. One was the Di Stefano study about identical antigen (disease pathogen only) levels between vaxed and unvaxed kids who got the standard vaccines in the 1980s, which AoA desconstructed last March. As the shills always say, her errors have repeatedly been pointed out to her, and yet she continues to post the same citations to the same ridiculous, so-called "studies," as proving that the big vax/unvax study has already been done. She knows that her studies do not show this at all, but she's hoping that they look impressive and most people are not going to check it out.


Reply · Like

· August 16 at 7:48pm
.


Inside Vaccines

"Not really" sounds like a suspicious answer to me. Later Reiss says just no. But I think the first response is a giveaway.
If someone asks you if you are mad at them, and you answer, "Not really, " it basically means you are but don't want to come out and say it or you are a little mad.
I think Reiss "really" meant to say, "yes."
I think she is basically a sick puppy who wants to be patted on the head, really.

@no-vac, I think you are quite likely to be correct. Either that, or she has a serious OCD thing going on.

But we're whistling in the dark unless we can show hard evidence. And I think the evidence is out there (unless she/they start deleting posts). And if we can show all those posts, that will, I think, convince a lot of people.

I really would like someone to find and add up all her posts on various news sites, blogs, FB, etc, especially during the week following the Katie Couric show.

See, even doing that kind of research would take far less time than the kinds of posts she's doing--and it's more time than I have! (Though probably your average high schooler could do it in a minute flat...)

Could be that pharma shills outside the US are posting comments on her behalf given the volume of posts and the times she's posted comments- 3:06 am, 3:29 am and 3:32 am? obsession? passion? or getting some help?

Tim,
The halls of medicine are a very dirty place. Professor Reiss in her calm measured way, is fighting to keep it that way. It's nasty and it's making people sick. Many die. Keep looking. Check the corners. Pick up the carpet. Then you'll also wonder why she's doing it.

You say you personally haven't been paid to agree with Pharma? Here's an exercise for you. Ask your doctor where his office's lunch comes from. Ask a medical student who wrote, published and "donated" his textbooks. Go to the universities and ask where their research funding comes from. Go to the NIH, CDC, FDA, and ask what is their financial affiliation with Pharma (don't overlook the revolving door of those who after promoting Pharma products as government experts go on to highly paid positions within Pharma)? Go to any medical conference and see who funded it. Ask the AMA, AAP, ACOG, etc., how much they receive from Pharma each year? Ask how much Pharma donated to build their association's buildings? Go ahead. Now go to the media that the public relies on for information and reporting on currents events in government, science and medicine. Find out what would be left to fund television and print media if Pharma withdrew its advertising dollars. Oh, and go and ask members of Congress how much Pharma has donated to them in each year that they've been in office and to get them into office.

See, Tim, they might not be paying you, but they're paying enough people around you to keep you in the dark. So please take a closer look. Then please come back and let us know again what you think of Professor Dorit Reiss.

Tim

It is an honourable thing to defend one's friends but nevertheless there are issues of substance here, and Dorit Reiss's afilliations bear on her ideolological leanings and polemics. It is a legitimate area of discussion.

I do not expect this to see the light of day, but l know Dorit as a calm, measured and reflective person who quietly applies the letter and spirit of the law according to evidence, statute and established case.
I cannot comment on her finances, other than to say that I have never been recruited by Big Pharma, Big Vegetarian or Big Cycling to promote their goods and services, despite being an advocate for many of their policies, so it is unlikely in the same way you are probably not paid by Big Wakey or Big Merola or Big Homeopathy.
Attacking a person, rather than the evidence or logic, does nothing to strengthen your arguments and merely makes you appear mean spirited rather than dedicated advocates for fair treatment.
My email address relates to a band , not any mental state.

Anonymous,
I hope your son and husband recover good health. I hope too that you and your colleagues will hopefully soon muster the courage to come forward publicly with strong loud voices. The intimidation and fear is what the criminals are counting on to perpetuate their tightening death grip on your profession and the world. If enough doctors stand up with integrity against corruption, the grip has to loosen. It is you and your colleagues that hold the power. They can only control you if you let them. What if across the country and world 1000s of doctors spoke out? They can only 'Wakefield' you if you stand alone. But, even if you find few others courageous or principled enough, I hope you will choose to do what is right and stand shoulder to shoulder with Dr. Wakefield.

If vaccines do in fact cause or worsen the autistic condition, this should be the primary focus of research, so we can mitigate the damaging effects. Instead, we find, despite the evidence showing vaccines do in fact harm SOME people, thus leading to autism, we find rabid denial, vicious attacks and a campaign to villify any parent that dares to say their child was damaged by vaccines. I find this very suspect. Very odd. Perhaps it's true that when some people are so influenced by promotions and money they simply fail to see the reality set before them. No longer are they able to see the damage caused by the product that finances their education and philosophical agenda. In that, they become emotionally and spiritually compromised, rendering them puppets and pawns in a controversy that demands honestly, integrity, courage and COMPASSION.

It is likely that Dorit Reiss in reality is a whole organization of pharma-mafia. One professional person would not have time or desire to spread so many propaganda pieces all over the media. I think her name is only a mask.

Bugs under glass, thanks for posting that FaceBook link.

Dorit's posts, JUST ON AoA's FB page July 6-9. Here we go:

July 6th
3:59 pm
11:52 pm
11:53 pm
11:57 pm

July 7th
12:01 am
7:54 am

July 8th
2:26 am
2:28 am
3:02 am
3:26 am
3:29 am

July 9
3:32 am

What time zone is AoA's FaceBook page in? Somehow, I kind of doubt that a working mother of a young child would spend time on FaceBook, ON THE PAGE OF A GROUP WITH WHOM SHE STRONGLY DISAGREES, at midnight, then the next morning at 8 am, then the next night/morning at 2 am.

When I was trying to balance young children with work, it was all I could do to keep up with the laundry, and I wasn't even on the internet then.

Can anyone else find posts by her during those same days, anywhere else?

I think it would be pretty damning evidence if anyone could find hundreds of posts in that time frame...or during any other similar time frame.

Dorit is everywhere No way is she not paid - it's part of her job. She has been writing nasty accounts Markus Heinze's very good book As well Clara Oscura is another one.

Sorry for the bad grammar and sentence structure in prior post---long, tiring day.

Her and her gang tried to goad me into revealing the names of the team of doctors treating my husband and son for their autoimmune disorder. Because I commented on an online article that I was a medical professional and that the doctors treating both my family have concurred they should no longer be vaccinated. They're on a witch hunt to discredit any of us in health care and medicine who speak honestly about the potential adverse effects of vaccines. But I don't engage with bad faith players who aren't honest about their motivations...I only posted to reach that one reader who is starting to question.

There are many of us in medicine with vaccine injured family members and children now, and that is how the tide is turning. We don't need to yell our opinions on blogs or in articles, or to run the risk of being 'Wakefielded'. However we can effect change by sharing our stories and enlightening our medical colleagues and patients -- one by one; day in and day out.

I find that Dorit's comments on the blogs and attacks on families who have vaccine injured children beligerent, demeaning, mean spirited...but, mostly unprofessional. Her attacks and volume of posts indicate to me that her motives are questionable. I ask her and anyone else to walk in the shoes of the injured, their once healthy lives ruined...CAUSED...by the vaccine. Her attempts at trying to discredit and demean these families is vile. These families and those injured have suffered more than they should have and more than she will ever know and care to acknowledge. To be subjected to her merciless comments is not right. Her actions should be reported to the American Bar Association for her bullying antics. It is a disgrace that a conversation cannot be had on a public forum that raises awareness for every parent to investigate and make their own decisions regarding any vaccine. It is not surprising that the affiliations with Kaiser, the law school and Merck are present.

Isn't it ironic that the pro-vaccine, pro-pharma coven paint themselves as "skeptics," when actually, they're the ones trying to force us to believe industry-engineered lies?

I guess that's part of their propaganda...

Dorit Reiss and a tag-teaming group of Skeptics who all belong to Skeptic front group hubs like "Jenny McCarthy Body Count" and "Stop the Australian (Anti) Vaccination Network" simultaneously appeared on the Age of Autism Facebook page back in July. It's a relatively long thread. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=566017186770642&id=183383325034032&comment_id=85896608&offset=0&total_comments=24

The little Skeptic gaggle vehemently denies that their appearance was coordinated with Reiss. In any case, she has an awful lot of time on her hands for someone with an academic legal career and a child. It would appear this is her career and, furthermore, it would appear that her direct interactions and eliciting responses from consumers on comments sections may be part of her research.

If that's the case, she would be one of those really creepy hands-on types of researchers that doesn't mind directly witnessing the painful paroxysms of their "subjects" when the shock machine is fired up and likes to personally flip the switch. Readers on AofA are largely parents of catastrophically injured and sometimes deceased children. On the thread, Reiss's Skeptic "assistants" can be seen at times interrogating readers as to their reasons for not complying with the vaccine schedule. Then Reiss and friends disappear quite quickly when it was suggested that she did not have "expressed consent" from readers or the forum to use readers' statements for any kind of intel gathering or research work. Her final statement was to argue that she didn't need permission.

Since the time each post appears along with the post, can anybody come up with a computer program that can track exactly what time all her posts have appeared?

Because I see them appear at all hours, and I mean ALL HOURS. 6 am. 10 am. 11 am. Dinner time. Bed time. midnight. 2 am.

And as Christina Waldman mentioned, there have been thousands.

It would be really, really nice to know exactly how many, and exactly when they were posted.

CMO
To my horror; my daughter is one of those adults that are up on her DTaP shot.

It has been a he double hockey sticks this year.

Pardon my French - too -- Joy B.

DORIT is a liar.
Period.
We know it
Liar DORIT -- LIAR.

So what is the term for this type of money laundering - whose your Daddy, as you spend hours upon hours on the computer blogging? . I get this image of a blood shot eyed lady with fingers flying across the key board till smoke is rising around her --half way hiding her house or office (take your pick) which is in complete dis a ray. Her surroundings is in a mess - because it takes time to write -- esp when you are trying make nonsense sound reasonable.

And Bob Moffit thanks for the list of companies that provided the public with useful information.

It never ends really though does it.

Dorit is only one bacterium in this disgusting culture the unregulated world of capitalism has become.

This is absolutely horrifying, but shouldn't surprise. And you can bet your bottom dolla than Dorit is their man on the job, and not just PR in promotion of the product. She has been hired to DEFEND the gov when the whole thing falls apart. So along with softening the image of the entire corrupt concept that is ageny/regulatory capture, here's a recent paper from her regarding ESTOPPEL, for fck's sake. EXCUSE MY FRENCH.

From the abstract alone, she seems to be arguing that the gov employ more administrative control to the legal system b/c....the UK, Israel, and France sometimes, sort of, do it too. Apologies if I'm way off, going to read the entire thing just now, but here's the abstract:

The United States’ Supreme Court had never upheld a claim of estoppel against the government. A citizen relying on government’s advice does that at her peril: if the government was wrong, if it misrepresented the statute or interpreted it wrongly, it can (by some interpretations, must) go back on its word and the citizen has no recourse. The Supreme Court provided many arguments for that position, but the core of them involves protection of what the Europeans refer to as “the principle of legality”: the executive does not have the ability to waive requirements from primary legislation or deviate from statutes, even to protect reliance. Similar concerns enter the law in other systems – as demonstrated in this article for the U.K., France and Israel. However, this position comes with a price. There are costs to the (usually innocent) relying citizen, both in money and in autonomy. There are costs to the government, in loss of trust and potential loss of legitimacy. The United States’ approach does not balance these costs; it completely privileges the principle of legality. The other systems discussed here do a better job balancing both interests and providing some protection to the relying citizen. They protect reliance in a number of situations. And they provide monetary damages in other cases, where forcing the government to adhere to its initial position would harm the public interest too much. This article suggests that not protecting reliance is unjustified, and draws on the comparative materials to demonstrate the interests at stake and offer a solution to the dilemma that allows the court to protect the principle of legality while also protecting the citizen’s interest: by suggesting an administrative law solution, and by providing a monetary remedy in appropriate cases.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2309145

So this is another of her scholarly works; Orwellian but posing 'fair-n-balanced' in its treatment of...what IS it that she's shilling for? Totalitariainism? I guess someone has to do it, late-capitalist paradigm and all.

But clumsy verbiage and double negatives notwithstanding, she seems like the perfect candidate for the job - as this paper seems to show, she is undergoing or has recently concluded some sort of gov sponsored 'apprenticeship' in perception management aka BS.

I always wondered what the point was of the recent propaganda laws enacted, wouldn't it all be too obvious, when these torrents of unabashed propaganda were unleashed? Warmongering, Financial perfidy, etc? Of course! Vaccine damage! Duhh. Mengele is salivating in his grave.

Yes because people who have unencumbered access to vaccines must spend every hour God sends (in conjunction with their familial and employment responsibilities) defending vaccination, coercing others to vaccinate and for free no less!

let's see

tort liability for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children...

On the "flu emergency" whim of a twenty something county health care worker, parents are expected to inject a "liability free" mercury vaccine, banned for use in many other countries, into their children ???

About 90% of adults are behind on their adult pertussis vaccines... seems we should get a few hundred million of those done first.

All this posting on school time at Hastings? Strange. May be it's better than doing it on her poor kids' time.

No conflicts ..lol

Angus

always follow the money/influence, backing trail...it always leads to the worshipal alter of vaccines for everyone regardless if you have an immune or metabolic insufficiency...sacrifice thyself to the greater good, the beyond what we can see argument....

Suddenly I feel the corral pen around me....bah bah bah....moo moo moo....this way gentlemen...you get a nice ride to this factory with pretty lights...and cutting devices...scene blacks out...your now in cow and sheep heaven..wondering...what the hell happened to me?

The likes of Dorit can write and say what they like but if vaccines are so safe, how and why do they keep debating with us all for over 20 years that we are wrong

So Dorits strategy is to try to silence the canary.
Instead of "do no harm" she would cause further harm
to families already hurt by vaccine injury. Well folks I always wondered how Hitler managed to snow everyone, how even the smartest people could not see it until it touched them.
I now see how evil works,
Bit by bit.
Denial by denial.
Motivated by hatred , authoritarianism, paternalism, lies, and silencing.
Those who speak out about vaccine injury are angry but motivated by love for out children. Those who attack us are motivated by denial and hatred. Only someone motivated by hatred would say some of te cruel things I have seen posted by the likes of dorit. She refuses to see because it would cost her career. There is no money in telling our truths. There is lots of money in telling their lies.

God save us from the wicked witch of the west. No compassion no shame greed and cruelty. Instead of fixing the issues with vaccines kill the messengers.
Some country is going to figure out that we are exporting autism. And their wrath, not watered down by pharma bribes, will be enormous.

Well, that explains a lot.

The fact that Reiss hasn't mentioned these associations means that she does perceive a conflict of interest and knows that others would perceive it too.

Wow. So the insert of every vaccine points out it is counter indicated or hasn't been tested for pregnancy, allergies, or administration with other vaccines. If you go against this and your child is harmed you are toast with no recourse. If you don't vaccinate and some other kid gets the latest flu you can be sued? This is the craziest thing I have ever heard. And why is kaiser who prides itself on the fact that they don't allow doctors to be wined and dined by drug company reps --why are they as an organization according money from Merck to do "studies". They know this is against their principals of independence. They have gone to the dark side. Wow. How insanely cruel to target parents to make them pay for the flaws of industry. The liability for the flaws of the product already does fall on parents as we have no recourse if our child is injured.
Now they want us to pay again ...I truly think this will backfire . And I truly think purgatory for these people will consist of great pain and no way to communicate until they finally get the empathy they are lacking for this trap.

You'll notice too, that Dorit says "no one is paying me to post here" leaving open the possibility that posting in general could be a different matter. As someone else suggested she may be posturing for a big job that doesn't require her to pass the bar.

Interesting situation here. A law prof, working at a school that has turned out to be for all intents another of the varied arms of pharma babble distribution in disguise, makes so many seemingly independent posts in the guise of concerned parent defending Gardasil, all the while asserting she has no vested interest in doing so, that she has little to no time to do her job. She admits she's on the clock at the school while doing this, so the school should either be cracking down on her use of their time, or they are telling her to do this. It doesn't look like that have cracked down. The studies she cites in defense of Gardasil are done by or on behalf of its maker. How do they think people can't see the blatant lack of independence? Then to top it all off, there's a reason they are using a law expert to do this work. Tort law against non vaccinated kids infecting the vaccinated? Now it's official. Brace for another big wave everybody.

" In a 2011 paper Reiss advocated the benefits of agency capture" .. wherein Riess provided an intellectually flawed, morally dishonest, Orwellian type defense .. of the "benfits" derived when regulatory agencies develop "close relationships" between an industry and those agencies responsible for regulating that industry.

According to Reiss .. "Industry usually has information no one else has, and has more incentive to give that information to a friendly regulator".

Really?

While I agree that "industry usually has information no one else has" .. only an idiot would believe that "industry" has any "incentive" to voluntarily give that information to a "friendly regulator". In fact, common sense dictates the complete opposite would happen.

I don't remember ANY incidence in history .. where industry provided information that resulted in greater regulation of their industry's methods or products? Tobacco? GMO? Vioxx?

Name ONE?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.