By Josh Mazer
Media pressure directed at vaccine injured families has been ramped up in recent months, coinciding with the March 2014 release of the latest ASD prevalence numbers. Main stream media editorials label vaccine cautious parents as “whackos” and worse. Hate speech, phony “astro –turf” public relation campaigns, and unqualified “experts” such as Dorit Reiss are the tools being used in a naked pharma funded power grab aimed at rescinding parental rights of informed medical consent.
The Washington Post, New York Times, The Daily Beast, Time Magazine and a cast of similar hundreds all recently released eerily similar editorials condemning parental vaccine choice. Time Magazine's Jeff Kluger describes parents exercising careful, informed medical consent as "morally equivalent" to "Extremists in the Middle East and Africa." His bigoted hate speech includes the terms "vaccine crazies” and "extremists anti vaccine nut jobs.”
Notwithstanding her complete lack of medical credentials, Reiss has emerged as the public face of the campaign to outlaw vaccine choice. She has posted over 30,000 times on public message boards, including Facebook; penned articles and editorials; and made personal appearances at vaccine industry conferences. Her 1500 comments on the Couric HPV story were almost exclusively aimed at dismissing out of hand all parental reports of adverse reaction to the HPV shot. Reiss’s tactics and agenda are further exposed by perusing a sampling of her prodigious output on various public comment boards.
May 9, 2014 Bloomberg The View ran an editorial by Lisa Beyer entitled “It’s Uncool Not to Vaccinate.” The comment section gives an unvarnished view of Reiss in action. She lies repeatedly; denigrates qualified expert medical experts; argues for suppression of free speech; and advocates state authority to override informed medical consent.
First, her lies. The following quotes are taken from the comment section ,:
"there is no evidence the current schedule is unsafe;" "There's no evidence that splitting the vaccines is any safer. The recommended schedule is carefully designed after an elaborate, deliberative, science based process;" "the evidence is very clear: vaccines do not cause autism;" "Mr. Deer…. did not write on medical issues in the BMJ ." "when there is a real problem with a vaccine, it is publicly discussed and handled…""The NVICP has never awarded compensation for vaccine-induced autism"
Opinions are not facts, and every statement by Reiss above is a demonstrable lie.
Reiss second technique, repeated thousands of times, is to denigrate the medical expertise of anyone who stands in her way. The following Reiss quotes are from Bloomberg View:
On Lawrence Solomon: "It's unfortunate that Mr. Solomon continues with his tradition of inaccurate anti-vaccine articles"
On Dr. Jon Poling: "In 2008, still upset from his daughter's regression, Dr. Poling bought into the vaccines cause autism myth."
On the entire Japanese Vaccine Safety Establishment: "Japan has a history of withdrawing vaccines based on unsupported claims of harms….Here, too, it withdrew it's recommendations without evidence of causation….Hardly a good public health decision."
On Dr Pete Doshi, former post doc fellow at Johns Hopkins: "Dr. Doshi is not an epidemiologist, and his analysis of the flu vaccine suffers from some serious errors. "
On Dr. Brogan: "it's unfortunate that Dr. Brogan concluded, with no evidence, that Mr. Webb died from "vaccine induced encephalitis"
On Dr. Bart Classen: "Dr. Classen, known for his bad science…. is miscounting vaccines. He makes other inaccurate claims. It's really bad science….he does bad science….Dr. Classen made basic errors….and generally does bad science."
On Dr. Diane Harper: (she)" did not attack the vaccines - that's actually a hoax…..She did, however, say inaccurate and critical things about the HPV vaccine "
On the late Dr. Bernadine Healy, former director of NIH and past president of the American Red Cross:
"It's unfortunate that Dr. Healy did not carefully examine the studies."
On the same comment board, Reiss argues against parental control over medical decisions for their kids, and comes out n favor of suppression of free speech:
"And of course, if someone chooses to reject expert advice, ignore the relative risk, and risk a disease, and their decision harms another, they should pay for the result of their choice. After all, personal responsibility means that you do not impose the costs of your unreasonable actions on others."
"The state has the role of parens patriae, watching after children's welfare. That is why the Supreme Court, from very early on, allowed the state to require that children be vaccinated - that, and protecting the public health. Parental rights are important, but they have limits".
"The reason to require the unvaccinating parent to pay is because their choice not to take a precaution caused the harm"
"Since vaccines do not damage children, and the lack of vaccinating can harm children, the state may step in to protect children against their parents' decision to leave them at risk."
"We don't give the flat earth society equal voice in the media as we do to astronomers, and we should not give anti-vaccine organization equal voice either. Because misinforming the public by presenting false information as correct is a journalistic failure."
"Parental rights have limits; children have a right to health. Not vaccinating puts those children at risk of preventable diseases".
"if misinformation spread by you causes harm to others, why shouldn't you pay?"
"I am not for forcing vaccines against the parent's will except in unusual circumstances."
"the state can regulate to limit, for example, access to school. Because parental rights are not absolute: children also have rights, as does the community.”
“For the providers of misinformation, maybe we should consider other modes of accountability, like regulating commercial speech. Or applying the tort of misrepresentation, which is what the train example referred to."
This representative compilation of the worst of Reiss in her own words is an ugly depiction of the bigotry orchestrated against vaccine injured families. The basic rule of pediatric diagnostics- listen carefully to the parents- is not operational f the suspected injury is iatrogenic vaccine induced encephalopathy. In that case, the parents are “anti vaccine whack jobs,” ”liars,” grifters, or just plain soft brained, easily swayed morons. If Reiss really wants to be helpful, she should support my proposal for the Unvaccinated Injury Act. Parents concerned that an unvaccinated child harmed their vaccinated kid with an infectious disease will have a no fault, government streamlined program to seek redress. All they have to do is prove their case to a special master. It will be as fast, simple, and fair as the VICP. What could possibly go wrong?
Our right of informed medical consent is under heavy assault by well financed, ruthless special interest groups. Their tactics include vilification of innocent parents, heavy handed propaganda campaigns, and the use of ersatz experts like Reiss to spread their agenda. The ultimate goal is a two tiered society based on vaccination status. Parents who vaccinate according to an arbitrary industry/pharma schedule will be more equal than parents who don’t.
For a good insight into how this battle will be waged, please read Rachel Aviv February 2014 New Yorker piece. Character assassination; psychological profiling; and out and out lying are all part of the game plan.
Josh Mazer ives in Annapolis with his wife Jennifer, three children, one Portuguese water dog, and a schnauzer. He is a well-known and outspoken advocate for the rights and health of developmentally delayed children and adults.