Dorit Rubinstein Reiss and the Weakness of Vaccine Science
Weekly Wrap: The Year Ahead

Dachel Media Review: Diagnosis, Clinic for Vaccine Choice

Online newsBy Anne Dachel

Read Anne's commentary after the jump.

Dec 20, 2013, UConn Today: A Better Approach to Diagnosing Autism

Dec 19, 2013,; Princeton Students Get Smart on Vaccines

Dec 18, 2013, Sacramento Bee: Clinic opens for parents who oppose vaccinating children

UConn Today

As the number of children with autism increases nationwide, the need for effective and consistent clinical diagnosis is growing. A statewide committee recently published new guidelines designed to ensure health professionals, educators, parents, and all involved in diagnosing a child with autism are using proven and consistent practices.

The guidelines stress, among other things, that effective autism diagnosis and treatment requires a collaborative approach.

Mary Beth Bruder, a professor in UConn's Neag School of Education and in the UConn School of Medicine, was co-chair of the committee, which spent four years developing the "Connecticut Guidelines for a Clinical Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder." . . .

Bruder says Act Early Connecticut is now pursing the funding needed to educate and train all state professionals involved in autism diagnoses on the best practices included in the guidelines.

The rising number of children with autism makes this extremely important work, she notes.

Unfortunately there's no comment section on this story or I'd ask a lot of questions:

Why, after two decades of epidemic increases in a disorder no official can explain, are we still talking about getting the diagnosis right?

Why is autism never talked about as a crisis?

Why are autism reports ALWAYS ABOUT CHILDREN?

Why do we keep hearing that the numbers are increasing---with no explanation given?

What proof is there that scientists 'are working very hard to determine why this increase is happening'?

"A better approach to diagnosing autism"? ...even better "better diagnosing"? VBS. 

They have come of age at a time when it has become popular, among a subset of prosperous and educated Americans, to reject vaccination as unnecessary and even harmful. Despite a thorough debunking of claims that vaccines cause autism, bogus theories about the dangers of vaccines persist.

We're told the claim of a link between vaccines and autism has been thoroughly debunked...please go to the CDC website for more info.  How naïve and trusting do they think we are? I posted 10 comments.

Sacramento Bee

 UC Davis Medical Center physician Dean Blumberg stood in front of the state Legislature last year and testified in support of a new law that will make it more difficult for families to opt out of vaccinating their children.

Next month he is opening a clinic to make it easier.

Families will be able to meet with a medical practitioner in the hospital's pediatric outpatient clinic to get the counseling and signature required to enable them to enroll their kids in school without immunizing them.

The new state law, passed in August 2012, goes into effect Jan. 1. It requires parents filing a personal belief exemption to also submit a document signed by a doctor or other approved medical practitioner acknowledging they have been told about the benefits and drawbacks of vaccines. Personal belief exemptions are largely filed by parents who are afraid that vaccines could harm their children, a position disputed by most medical authorities.

More children should be given vaccines, said Blumberg, the chief of Pediatric Infectious Diseases for the medical center. "Immunizations work and children do benefit," he said. "I thought the law was a good one. I was all for it."

So, why start a clinic with the primary focus of signing immunization waivers?

The doctor said he was motivated to start the clinic after listening to the passionate parents who came forward to testify against the immunization law. Many believed their health providers would not sign the personal exemption form, he said.

"I'm pro-immunization, but I'm also in support of parental rights," Blumberg said. "That's why we decided to set up the clinic as a community service, in case there are parents whose health care provider won't sign the form or some parents who don't have a primary care provider."

An incredible story. A doctor listened to parents testimony and he made a major change in his practice. I can't imagine the reaction of the medical community.  Meanwhile this doctor is a true hero.



Something is definitely fishy here. Since when does UC Davis Medical Center house a clinic for "anti-vaxers" and since when does the Sacramento Bee announce such a clinic? I hope someone will go to this clinic and report back on what's really going on there.

Cherry Sperlin Misra

Most of the doctors are so brainwashed as to be totally convinced that vaccines are safe- and this brainwashing is reinforced daily by their colleagues. Could it be that Dr. Blumberg is hoping to have a database of non vaccinating parents, so that one day he can say "Look, here is a practise of X number of non vaccinating parents and they too have the same rate of autism !" For a whole variety of reasons he would not wish to mix this data base with his previous practice of vaccinating parents. This could be the vax/unvax study we have been waiting for, but my cynical mind tells me that there would be ways of fixing that, CDC data-fixing style, or perhaps his plan would quietly be dropped when they find no autism among the unvaccinated.
The explanation that some parents want to vaccinate but dont because filling the form is easier, is an excuse cooked up as a cover for this project and it will play very well with the rather large subset of doctors who love to complain about nutty, lazy parents. Doctors dont have a lot of spare time to devote to new projects, so there has to be a motive.


If Laura has listened to this man and thinks he's a snake, that's enough for me. There are a lot of young parents who have decided not to vaccinate but who can be intimidated with authoritarian scare tactics. Physicians are now being trained on how to persuade the vaccine resistant. I wonder how many vaccines he intends to stock in that nonvaccinating clinic.


Some one on here blogged, recently; that they had looked for a doctor that would not be so bullish on vaccines, and after talking to a pediatricians thought that was the doctor for their baby.

The first visit; the doc said they would start off with just one vaccine.

The one vaccine turned out to be five vaccines in one.

This is a new game that is being played.

Some of us that have been around for a long time know that what is one parent's story are all parents' stories.

Don't doubt that these pediatricians all meet at some meeting, and some head man who had another meeting for heads: will tell them what they are to do on vaccines. .

This is their new game. The new trick! They say one - and they are not lying it is one shot. Just like let's get that tetanus shot, but it is the DTaP.


But then again, if this guy already has another practice set up, why not just have parents that need a signature visit the practice he already has set up, for this purpose?

Seems to me that most parents who would utilize the services of this non-vaccinating clinic are those who have no other means to acquire a signature (they most likely use non-traditional practitioners). So this essentially would be a one time only visit to obtain the signature...

Given the above, it does seem a little curious as to how this type of clinic would even be sustainable...



I understand re: deceit and the sheep/wolf analogy, believe me. if what you're saying is true about this guy, then I would completely understand the cynicism re: his clinic.

I read he states he fully supports parental rights issues, thus figured that PERHAPS he was truly swayed by the parents' testimonies about vaccine damage to their kids.

So IF he's genuinely supportive of parental rights, I would support his endeavors with this clinic.

But if he's just a shill and this clinic is nothing more than a cover/lure to draw non-vaccinating parents in, then don't use this clinic.

I cannot imagine any non-vaccinating parent going to this clinc (knowing it's for non-vaccinating parents) and then that parent CAVES upon receipt of this guy's risk/benefit BS. Doesn't make any sense to me...

That's no different than a non-vaccinating parent caving to the risk/benefit rhetoric with the allopathic physician they're already seeing. I can't imagine they'd suddenly do a 180 and vaccinate in those circumstances, either.

So again, why on earth would an educated parent who doesn't vaccinate, see this guy and then cave in to the R/B rhetoric. I don't see that happening. So if this particular physician feels he can reign a few more non-vaccinating parents in, I think he'll soon discover that's not going to happen.


"The law is likely to result in more vaccinations, Blumberg said, because many parents sign the personal exemptions out of convenience. This happens when school is about to start and families haven’t gotten around to getting their children vaccinated. They sign the exemption instead. Now parents will be required to visit a doctor either way, so 'why not get their immunizations instead of getting their forms signed,' Blumberg said."

Yes, that part ticked me off. When I was working on AB499 out here, I would receive this same rhetoric from various school district bureaucrats, but I would counter that MOST parents I knew that didn't vaccinate, were not vaccinating BECAUSE they were fully educated about the risks/benefits FOR THEIR KIDS, NOT because they were lazy and just signed out of convenience. That's ridiculous...

Some parents - perhaps - but certainly not most.


I can see both sides; not sure what to think. It's a little like "damned if they do, damned if they don't."

IF he's genuinely concerned about parents' concerns, then I'm all for this clinic. But again, if he has another agenda...guess that remains to be seen.

What do parents think will happen with this database, if this is this guy's intentions. Forced vaccinations in the future; insurance dropping you/your kids if not vaccinated?

Jeannette: There's obviously never been true informed consent re: vaccination, so that's a given, but I see your point.

Well, all I can say is, if folks don't trust this guy as far as they can throw him, then don't go to him. Find someone else...

I can't imagine he'd have that many parents going to this clinic anyway.

Parents in California can acquire a signature in any number of ways - it doesn't have to be in person. You can acquire a signature via fax or by phone as well. I would imagine if parents of unvacc'd kids are already being seen by an allopath, the same would certainly be willing to sign off on the card, right?

Laura Hayes

Hi Anne,

Sorry to disappoint you, but I sat and had to listen to "Doctor" Blumberg rattle on ad nauseum at 2 separate hearings regarding AB 2109 in CA, and my opinion is that he is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Don't be deceived. I think that this man will be behind forced vaccinations one day as he refuses to acknowledge that vaccine injury is REAL, and growing, he showed zero compassion for all of us who spoke at the hearings regarding our vaccine-injured children, he completely dismissed Dr. Wakefield's work, he made no mention of non-harmful ways to keep our children healthy and developing normally, he appeared completely uninformed about all of the dangers and inefficacies of vaccines, and as such, it is my opinion that he has no business giving the lecture to parents that is now required to be had before being able to utilize a PBE in CA. As I have written before, parents in CA who now want to exercise their right to utilize a PBE will now be FORCED TO SUBMIT TO AN UNINFORMED LECTURE OF PERSONAL OPINION BY A SPECIFIED HEALTHCARE PRACTITIONER. What a total joke, a total sham, a total usurping of a parent's rights and a U.S. citizen's rights, a total violation of medical choice freedom to which the U.S. agreed when it signed the Nuremberg Code after WWII wartime atrocities/crimes were committed in the name of "medicine", and the utmost sign of what has become an ignorant, arrogant, sold-out profession instead of a noble one. Again I say, beware of a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Jeannette Bishop

I can't view the Sacramento Bee post without cynicism either. At the most innocent level, the guy helped to get a crony-capitalist law passed that benefits his profession, big pharma, and all the politicians who were lobbied to support this bill. Then he sets up a business supposedly to "serve" to this newly mandated group of customers himself.

This part especially concerns me:

"The law is likely to result in more vaccinations, Blumberg said, because many parents sign the personal exemptions out of convenience. This happens when school is about to start and families haven’t gotten around to getting their children vaccinated. They sign the exemption instead. Now parents will be required to visit a doctor either way, so 'why not get their immunizations instead of getting their forms signed,' Blumberg said."

I just don't see this happening where I live.

The state exemptions have not exactly been advertised (that might be the only plus to this legislation--if only people would start thinking about why the immune systems of so many seem to be scrambled). I've had to ask schools for the form, and some employees have had to check what to do or tell to me come back when a certain person was in the office who could access the form. The forms are supposed to be filled in and signed on site with instructions printed on the form to not let the form leave the building, and maybe I'm wrong, but I do not think any schools have been out there volunteering information to parents that they can just fill out this form last minute to get enrolled.

If parents are taking exemptions, they have some level of immune injury in their family or in their children as part of their "education." At least that's all I've seen.

So, the above claim makes me more suspicious, but even if the above was an honest opinion about what drives exemption status, if a physician believes we need higher levels of vaccination with the current schedule, approximately 95% compliance, and the current abysmal immune and neurological health of U.S. children, how much actual information on vaccination risks is he likely to give as part of this "service?"


"Meanwhile this doctor is a true hero."

He's either a hero, or he's intending to create a database. And then there's the sizable fee he gets to charge for the difficult task of signing his name.

Sorry, cynical in my old age.


Yet, I've read and heard that some parents don't trust this physician's reasoning behind starting this new clinic for non-vaccinating parents.

I can't imagine how difficult it must be for a physician who has been indoctrinated into the sanctity and almost religious zeal re: vaccination, to realize, perhaps with dawning horror, that so many parents of autistic children (and others) might be speaking the truth re: what caused their children to simply shut down shortly after vaccination.

I applaud this physician; I do feel he's a hero, given the backlash I would imagine he will be up against from within the allopathic medical community.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

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.


Post a comment

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

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)