RFK Jr says autism 'destroys' families. Here's what those families want you to know

As the parent of a 10 yo boy on the spectrum with a mother who is likely on the spectrum herself ( but the Red Guards when she was growing up weren't concerned about such things to diagnose her ) I can say that Kennedy knows absolutely nothing about Autism Spectrum Disorder or ASD. He is as ignorant as a new born but far from as innocent as one, spewing self serving lies that have made him wealthy as a litigator.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that some autistic children will never write poems.

SOME autistic children will never write poems. He never said all.

He said children with autism “will never pay taxes, they’ll never hold a job, they’ll never play baseball, they’ll never write a poem, they’ll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted.”

Here too, he was describing SOME children with autism, not all. They are misrepresenting RFKjr's statements in the way they are quoting him. This is just one more lame attempt to attack RFKjr.

So do brain worms.

Kennedy has described autism as a “preventable disease.”

It can only be a good thing that we're FINALLY willing to ask the hard questions about the explosion in autism rates - because pretending this is all just "better diagnostics" or coincidence is intellectual laziness at best, criminal negligence at worst.

The fact that so many in the media (and forum commenters) can’t see past someone's surname or political affiliation speaks volumes - they’re more interested in tribal loyalty than protecting children.

I personally think it's a beautiful thing that families with autistic children are looking for a positives out of their situation, but the truth is, having a child with autism is no future parent's Plan A. Autism is devastating families at unprecedented rates, and the people who rush to shout “misinformation” every time someone investigates potential environmental or pharmaceutical links are either bought, brainwashed, or both.

As the parent of a 10 yo boy on the spectrum

Then, as the caring father and human that I believe you are, wouldn't you welcome the fact that, finally, someone is at least asking the hard questions we’ve been too afraid - or too conditioned - to confront? When autism rates have alarmingly SKYROCKETED in just a few decades, wouldn’t it make sense to re-examine everything, including bloated childhood vaccination schedules, environmental toxins, and medical interventions that have changed radically over time? DT, just dismissing that exploration straight up because you don’t like the messenger is NOT the way to go.

It can only be a good thing that we're FINALLY willing to ask the hard questions about the explosion in autism rates - because pretending this is all just "better diagnostics" or coincidence is intellectual laziness at best, criminal negligence at worst.

No, it is not when it can be proved so. Just refusing to accept the evidence do absolutely nothing to negate it.

RFKjr is (again) completely wrong about something he can't understand and have mistaken beliefs born from prejudice. It is not that people can't see beyond his name, but instead his career, his repeated lies and self contradicting postures as well as deeply irrational beliefs that make him unreliable at best and a liar that should not be trusted ever at worst.

If the scientific consensus says something and RFKjr says the opposite then it is crystal clear the consensus is the one that is right. It is when it says microbes cause infection (something RFKjr don't believe) and it is right about vaccines not causing autism.

SOME autistic children will never write poems. He never said all.

That applies to everybody as well, some (most) neurotypical people will never write poems, do this means being neurotypical is to be prevented?

It is not like he is being misrepresented but that his claims are nonsensical and do nothing to support his claims,

If the scientific consensus says something and RFKjr says the opposite then it is crystal c

There is no such thing as a universal, unquestionable “scientific consensus” - there’s independent, unbiased science done in the public interest, and then there’s the heavily compromised, pharma-funded “science” propped up by regulatory capture and profit motives. When there is a difference in billions between a mandatory childhood vaccination schedule of 4 vaccines pre-1989 to 16 after it, you’re damn right studies can be steered, results buried, and dissent silenced.

Unfortunately, you're (once again) overlooking the dozens of peer-reviewed studies, government data, and whistleblower testimonies your Health and Human Services Secretary is bringing to the table. But of course, instead of engaging with the evidence, you seem to resort to smearing him personally, as if pointing to his last name or tone somehow discredits the mountain of questions he’s raising. Why?

I think the answer’s simple: because open inquiry threatens the bottom line, and when it comes to pharmaceutical conglomerates, money talks louder than truth ever gets to.

Doctors and medical experts have attributed the rise in autism cases — about 1 in 31 U.S. kids are now diagnosed with it — to increased awareness, especially around milder forms of the disorder.

That will account for some of the increase, but certainly not all. There has been a dramatic increase in autism, not only in diagnosis of autism.

There is no such thing as a universal, unquestionable “scientific consensus”

Which is irrelevant, precisely because anybody can improve the consensus with actual evidence is why it is much more reliable than the imaginations of a self accepted mentally handicapped person that has been found lying repeatedly for personal profit. There is no comparison on the level of reliability. RFKjr is not honest, is not capable, is not even rational. So whatever he says can be treated as wrong unless supported by actual evidence, something he never provides.

and then there’s the heavily compromised, pharma-funded “science” propped up by regulatory capture and profit motives

This is not an argument, is an excuse for not having an argument nor evidence, and it is the same excuse flat earthers and creationists (among other antiscientific propaganda groups) always try to use when confronted with the impossibility of their claims, "there is no evidence because every single institution of science in the whole world, in every country, is in a conspiracy". Impossible to believe or even consider seriously.

This applies specially when you are supporting baseless claims of someone that has been repeatedly proved to lie for personal profit.

Unfortunately, you're (once again) overlooking the dozens of peer-reviewed studies, government data, and whistleblower testimonies your Health and Human Services Secretary is bringing to the table.

No studies, no government data and obviously no whistleblower testimonies with any kind of evidence, that claim is completely false. The science is clear and it contradicts RFKjr claims systematically, HIV causes AIDS, microbes cause infection, vaccines do not cause autism. As simple as that.

That will account for some of the increase, but certainly not all. There has been a dramatic increase in autism, not only in diagnosis of autism.

The evidence available says the contrary, most if not all the increments is because of an increase of diagnostics.

For example:

https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h1961

The prevalence of the autism symptom phenotype has remained stable in children in Sweden while the official prevalence for registered, clinically diagnosed, autism spectrum disorder has increased substantially. This suggests that administrative changes, affecting the registered prevalence, rather than secular factors affecting the pathogenesis, are important for the increase in reported prevalence of autism spectrum disorder.

Refusing to accept the evidence of multiple studies do absolutely nothing to refute that evidence, if anything it only makes it clear that there is no argument that could do this, so people are forced to pretend the evidence is not there.

Which is irrelevant,

When you’re the one using it as the foundation of your entire argument, it absolutely is relevant. 

THEN in the next sentence, you also proceed to claim your Health and Human Services Secretary's points are automatically wrong regardless of the evidence. Talk about circular dogma. Just wow.

vaccines do not cause autism

What you mean is that certain studies, many funded or influenced by pharmaceutical interests, haven’t found a conclusive link in the ways they chose to measure it. But there are NUMEROUS peer-reviewed papers, whistleblower testimonies (like CDC scientist Dr. William Thompson), and alarming trends in autism rates that raise serious questions about the timing and content of the childhood vaccination schedule - ESPECIALLY when dozens of shots are given during CRITICAL stages of brain development. Simple. As. That.

Alternative media podcast watchers are the go to people on the topic of autism along with pretty much everything in the sciences.

Their input is so educated, wise and honest they even praise their own contributions.

Stunning.

When you’re the one using it as the foundation of your entire argument, it absolutely is relevant. 

No, it is still irrelevant to your argument, once again becaue you choose to ignore the rest of the comment, is irrelevant, precisely because anybody can improve the consensus with actual evidence is why it is much more reliable. This means that you are contradicting only your own strawman of considering a consensus dogmatic, which is obviously false, so you have done absolutely nothing to contradict the importance of the actual consensus. Your is the circular argument, make a false claim about the argument to prove it is invalid and then "prove" your false claim about the consensus in the fat that is invalid.

What you mean is that certain studies, many funded or influenced by pharmaceutical interests, haven’t found a conclusive link in the ways they chose to measure it.

The full literature is the one that says this, including scores and scores of studies of which you always claim they are wrong but never prove it, because this accusation you make is false. What conflict of interest is there for the study I linked? none? then you have to accept it is correct.

Not to count that the study makes it clear and explicit what is the methodology it followed, so anybody can go and repeat it with the original sources and see if the same conclusion can be made, you have made zero scientific arguments against the conclusions of the study, that again means you accept it is correct and disproves your claims.

And again, "whistleblower testimonies" are not scientific evidence unless they come with data, if the supposed testimonies can be debunked easily that is doubly the case

https://vaccinateyourfamily.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Whistleblower_QA012017_updatedSept2020.pdf

 Independent reviews of his claims have shown there is no evidence of an increase in autism cases after vaccination in African American boys or any other subset of the population.

RFK is a problem here. Whatever he says will be treated with suspicion because he is a conspiracy theorist and conspiracy theorists tend to be liars.

I’d like to see a study on how pathological dishonesty and a tendency towards conspiracy theories are linked.

The prevalence of the autism symptom phenotype has remained stable in children in Sweden...

so the same must be true elsewhere?

Do their kids get the same shots or are exposed to the same environmental pollution?

There have been studies on the link between dishonesty and a tendency towards conspiracy theories.

Thinking about it, it is so obvious.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/379400155_Conspiracy_Believers_Act_More_Dishonestly_and_Overestimate_Others'_Dishonesty

I hope the authors didn’t lie about their credentials or create an army of sock puppet accounts to praise their own research.

The arguments that prove your source is wrong are there, you could not refute any of them, that means your source has been debunked the same, it does not matter who repeats the arguments, absolutely none of them 

Are you still claiming there’s no conflict of interest in the sources pushed by pharmaceutical conglomerates, despite the billions they pour into regulatory capture, lobbying, and ghostwritten studies? You haven’t once attempted to prove that the many sources I have referenced are compromised, including the one the last discussion, yet you expect everyone to buy into the idea that some sort of coordinated global conspiracy would be required to disprove your points?

If you actually addressed the conflicts of interest in pharma-sponsored research, the track record of corporate fraud (Pfizer, J&J, GSK - all fined billions), or the way scientific debate is shut down in favor of profit and narrative control, then maybe you’d have an argument.

so the same must be true elsewhere?

Unless you can provide evidence of the contrary this is perfectly valid explanation that has been proved with evidence.

Do their kids get the same shots or are exposed to the same environmental pollution?

Again, in absence of evidence that the kind of vaccination schedule has any importance the explanation remains valid, and pollution would be an alternative explanation that also contradicts thinking vaccines are the cause.

Are you still claiming there’s no conflict of interest in the sources pushed by pharmaceutical conglomerates

My claim is that you have not identified any conflict of interest on the source I provided, so there is nothing to address, the source clearly proves detection can explain the increase on autism cases, in the same way there are countless sources that prove vaccines are not related to autism and against which there is no evidence of any conflict of interest, so the point remains valid and correct.

The anti-vaxers like to put false information out, the parents of these children want to blame someone or something other than their genetics and just plain nature.

Here are the facts. Autism has "increased" only because a better knowledge of it and a better diagnosis.

It is that simple.

Until the 1980s despite the word "autism" having been around a while, most were not diagnosed only the most obvious ones often the classic view.

And in many cases autistic people were wrongly diagnosed as other things like mentally disabled, schizophrenic, etc....

I am in the spectrum as is my daughter, I am too old to have been vaccinated (didn't have them when I was young) my daughter was vaccinated in Japan.

I often hear " there is no family history of autism in our family" yeah sure!?

The reality is it wasn't a well known diagnosis, but even more in the old days families "his" these people the dirty little secret no one in the family talked about, the great uncle place in a care facility, your parent's cousin no one ever met, etc... or as my grandmother would say "well cousin John was "touched" so he stained in his room at grandmother's house".

"Touched", "a little odd", "strange", "eccentric", "different" etc.... all words used to describe family members no one talked about.

Here is a fun one I recently saw on YT and widely distributed on social media.

"Japan has a very low occurrence of Autism, why is that?

They answer their own question with a great big lie!

" Japan delays vaccination until 2 years old"

Other say the same but the claim is 1 year old.

Now anyone that has had children born in Japan knows this to be false!

First vaccines start at 2 months old and the measles and rubella and mumps are 12 months to 15 months the same as North America.

These are the type of false claims anti-vaxers make and people believe them.

Here are the facts. Autism has "increased" only because a better knowledge of it and a better diagnosis.

Differences in diagnosis only accounts for a fraction of the increase in autism.

The anti-vaxers like to put false information out, the parents of these children want to blame someone or something other than their genetics and just plain nature.

A population's genetics does not change that fast, to account for the increase in autism.

Anti-vaxxers will just completely make things up to justify their reckless and dangerous ideas.

Autism is a tough one to work out. In some countries it seems much more prevalent than others, even in first world nations with similar healthcare.

What causes higher rates of autism in one nation rather than another? Are some people not being diagnosed? Are some especially older ones getting a later in life diagnosis being wrongly diagnosed as on the spectrum when they may have other issues causing them to be social awkward or display traits similar to autism.

Raw Beer

Today 02:53 pm JST

Here are the facts. Autism has "increased" only because a better knowledge of it and a better diagnosis.

> Differences in diagnosis only accounts for a fraction of the increase in autism.

Yes it does especially coupled with laws!

You can no long hide these children which was common just a few generations ago.

I went to a school for children with these problems and this was in the 70s and it was crazy the number of others that didn't even attend any sort of education or treatment.

Send the kid someplace, hide him or her away, etc... this was common and it get worse in places where laws are not universal and vary state to state province to province and record keeping was spotty at best!

In my school only one boy was officially diagnosed as "autistic" the rest had multiple other labels and most like myself were not diagnosed as being on the spectrum until early adulthood in the early to mid 80s.

I know it is easier to blame a vaccine than just accept that it is genetics or nature, but the facts are the facts.

If it was just the USA saying there is no connection between vaccines and autism then maybe there would be something to it, but the fact that research from dozens upon dozens of countries all say the same thing, vaccines do not cause autism.

It would need to be one extremely big and insanely organized conspiracy that all the research from countries as different as China, USA, Japan, South Korea, every EU country, a multitude of other Asian countries, south America, etc ... Would all be in a great big conspiracy together!

Think about it!

In coming years, when the USA hasn't just lost its reputation as a country of skilled scientific researchers, but is openly mocked for its scientific illiteracy, there is no question that Bobby Brainworms being elevated to a position for which he is entirely unqualified will be seen as one of the single most important moments in this downward trajectory.

They'll be no closer to understanding autism, but hey, at least some libz might have been pwned.

In coming years, when the USA hasn't just lost its reputation as a country of skilled scientific researchers, but is openly mocked for its scientific illiteracy

The sad thing is that it was avoidable.

He has the moron/conspiracy theory vote sewn up - trolling the libs keeps that lot happy. There was no need to go this far in doing serious harm.

Such a waste.

After reviewing the thread, there really seem to be two camps in this discussion.

On one side, you have people who sincerely want to understand why autism rates have skyrocketed over the past few decades. They’re asking hard questions, digging through data, challenging the system, and calling for accountability. They aren’t claiming to have all the answers - but they’re demanding that we actually look for them. They want transparency, real research, and the courage to explore causes without political or financial interference.

On the other side, we have those people who don’t offer ANYTHING but mockery and smug dismissal. They scream “conspiracy theory” any time someone questions the corporate-medical orthodoxy, all while offering NOTHING but shrugs, and blind trust in the same institutions that have failed to do absolutely ANYTHING about this devastating trend.

If nothing changes, nothing changes.

JayToday  04:04 pm JST

*After reviewing the thread, there really seem to be two camps in this discussion.*

On one side, you have people who sincerely want to understand why autism rates have skyrocketed over the past few decades. 

Except that's already been pretty much answered: we're better at recognising and diagnosing it.

It's about that simple. Much as some people would love it to be due to chemtrails, liberalism, wöke TV shows, jelly sandwiches, or the music of Madonna, it's actually just because experts are getting better and better at recognising it.

The actual cause of it is still a mystery, and has been for a long time. The idea that a completely unqualified joker will crack it in the time period he claimed, is risible, and also offensive to the people who have spent their professional lives working on it.

the people who have spent their professional lives working on it.

You can’t quite imagine them watching trash podcasts, spamming social media and praising their own posts, can you?

Useful people. All countries need them.

Differences in diagnosis only accounts for a fraction of the increase in autism.

You could not make any argument against the source that prove diagnostic improvements explain the increase, repeating the claim do nothing to support it. For that you need evidence that you have never presented.

A population's genetics does not change that fast, to account for the increase in autism.

There is zero requirments for genetics to change, that depends on your flawed assumption.

Autism is a tough one to work out. In some countries it seems much more prevalent than others, even in first world nations with similar healthcare.

That the parameters to decide whether a person is in the spectrum are also widely divergent is not a coincidence.

*After reviewing the thread, there really seem to be two camps in this discussion.*

Those that recognize the evidence about the issue and those that depend on impossible global conspiracies where every institution in the whole world is hiding "the truth" but have zero evidence to support this claim. It is not really that difficult.

Repeating that diagnostics do not explain the increase while being completely unable to refute the evidence that indicates this puts the person plainly in the second group. It is quite easy to see the difference when only the first group is the one bringing references.

Except that's already been pretty much answered: we're better at recognising and diagnosing it.

Except that explanation is often repeated as if it’s a full answer, but it falls apart under scrutiny. Have you thought about how the idea that it explains the ENTIRE rise - especially the dramatic spikes in the last few decades - just isn't supported by the data? Multiple large-scale studies have shown that even when controlling for diagnostic substitution, broader criteria, and increased awareness, there’s still a real increase that CAN'T be explained away by paperwork and awareness alone.

Even leading experts like Dr. Catherine Lord who's a major figure in autism research, and institutions like the NIH have acknowledged that environmental factors MUST be contributing, yet we still don’t aggressively study what those might be - likely because many of them (toxic exposures, early-life immune "disruptions," etc.) are, uh, a bit too economically inconvenient to explore.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-0366%2819%2930181-6/

Autism rates by country.

"Autism diagnosis rates vary considerably across countries, with factors like access to healthcare, diagnostic practices, and awareness levels playing a significant role. Countries with high diagnosis rates, such as Singapore and Japan, may have well-established healthcare systems and higher awareness of autism, leading to more frequent diagnoses."

"According to data published by the World Population Review, countries with the highest number of diagnoses of childhood autism per 100,000 children include Singapore (1,460), Japan (1,450) and Australia (1,160), US (1050)"

https://www.statista.com/chart/34227/number-of-children-diagnosed-with-autism/#:~:text=World%20Autism%20Awareness%20Day&text=According%20to%20data%20published%20by,)%20and%20Brazil%20(606).

Research tells us that autism tends to run in families, and a meta-analysis of 7 twin studies claim that 60 to 90% of the risk of autism comes from your genome.

https://www.autismspeaks.org/what-causes-autism

In the UK, a long time ago, I worked with several autistic kids. I also spent some time working in a "Steiner Village" in Scotland, which generally refers to a Camphill community, a movement founded on the ideals of Rudolf Steiner.

Except that explanation is often repeated as if it’s a full answer

That is because when studied this is enough to explain the increase as in the reference that I provided and that you could not criticize in any way, so you recognize it as valid and correct.

Repeating what has been clearly indicated by research is not wrong, actually it is desirable and correct. The problem is when people refuse to accept the evidence and even worse when they make up baseless claims about the problem and use global conspiracies as an excuse for not giving any evidence for that claim, that makes no sense and brings no progress at all.

Even leading experts like Dr. Catherine Lord who's a major figure in autism research, and institutions like the NIH have acknowledged that environmental factors MUST be contributing

Not must, but that they appear to have an influence, and those factors (according to your own source) are: "Convincing evidence suggests that maternal factors, such as age and features of metabolic syndrome, are associated with risk of autism spectrum disorder"

So absolutely nothing about "toxic exposures, early-life immune "disruptions," etc" as you baselessly claim. This is misrepresenting a source as if it claimed something that it does not, which is a very dishonest way to present a reference.

I know it is easier to blame a vaccine than just accept that it is genetics or nature, but the facts are the facts.

It might not be a vaccine. But vaccines certainly have not been ruled out.

But certainly something is causing it. It could be vaccines, pollution, food...

I'm confident RFKjr will get to the root causes of autism; he's not intimidated by corporate pressure.

That is because when studied this is enough to explain the increase as in the reference that I provided and that you could not criticize in any way, so you recognize it as valid and correct. 

It’s remarkable how hard your side works to shut down curiosity and defend the status quo - even when it’s failing millions of families.

Genuine question: do have any interest in the autism crisis being solved, or only in policing conversation? You mock anyone asking real questions about environmental triggers, epigenetic shifts, immune dysregulation, or toxic exposures, while offering no real answers beyond: “We’re just better at diagnosing it now.” That’s intellectually lazy, and families living through this know it.

It might not be a vaccine. But vaccines certainly have not been ruled out.

According to the best experts of the world, yes, they have conclusively. Trying to ignore the evidence that support this conclusion do nothing to negate it.

But certainly something is causing it. It could be vaccines, pollution, food...

Not vaccines, and general "pollution, food" would be easily recognized by now by the vast amount of studies being done about it.

I'm confident RFKjr will get to the root causes of autism

A person of diminished mental capacity, that has demonstrated to have low morals and changes opinion instantly for money? that is not a rational position, even if it was not something as solid as the current understanding.

It’s remarkable how hard your side works to shut down curiosity and defend the status quo - even when it’s failing millions of families.

It is not curiosity what is worth discarding but baseless claims and impossible global conspiracy theories that bring exactly zero benefit. No mocking but simply recognizing that the references that prove you are wrong are still there and you could not find any flaw in them, so your claim is still clearly disproved. Making up imaginary things to blame is not helping, instead is getting on the way of actual science which is the one that has helped control, prevent or cure countless conditions.

 “We’re just better at diagnosing it now.” That’s intellectually lazy, and families living through this know it.

Not at all, it is simply what was easy to prove, even if you want to have a personal belief that differs.