RFK Jr. Official Speech and Policy Decisions on Autism in NYT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

[Anonymous]

It's interesting how no one (like Fauci, Hotez, etc.) will debate RFK on the vaccine issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sad that Jeff locked the other Autism thread. I was about to gloat about RFK Jr. calling it a diagnosis that devastates a family. To the poster expressing anger at a school counselor trying to show appropriate empathy. Welcome to the new world where all neurodivergent people are undesirables -.-

You’re wrong. I was posting on that thread that the school counselor was not expressing “empathy.” of course the posters accusing OP of being autistic were not either. I also think RFK’s obsession with this one diagnosis as being uniquely catastrophical is wrong. In general I think the search for the cause of autism is probably a waste of resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

I’m talking about the far outside the mainstream doctors hes scouring the country far, not referring to medically unsophisticated parents or those with religious concerns.

In medical research someone who, on the basis of their political worldview, discounts essentially an entire scientific literature and sets out to cherry pick data to sloppily support their theory “by September” is, in fact, a whacko.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t we suffered enough?

He has clearly not read the studies that show eye tracking technology used on infants can help predict an autism diagnosis later on. BEFORE the MMR vaccine is given.

He claims genes can “do no more than predispose” someone to autism- but that is demonstrably false. There are certain genetic changes- chromosomal- that *cause* autism. No environmental impacts. Mild autism and moderate autism and severe autism. They account for 3-5% of diagnoses.

I was 32, yoga/Whole Foods healthy, fit when I got pregnant with my autistic son. Had an air purifier in my home and car. Drank purified water. When we went to genetics, they identified a genetic mutation.

And? Your child is the anomaly. The majority of autistic children do not have an identifiable genetic mutation. Fragile X, Rett, etc. are not commonplace especially among Level 1.

In terms of the impact and support needed, obviously the severe cases and those linked to a genetic disorder are the most important. The increase in level 1 cases is overdiagnosis caused by redefining a personality style as autism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

This is not a matter of viewpoint but the scientific process. The vaccine link to autism has been totally debunked. I suppose every scientific conclusion is up for re-examination but that is not what RFK is doing. He’s literally just digging up the fraudulent research that was already disproven.

[Anonymous]

Tilting at windmills. Elect a clown and enjoy the circus. What a waste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

This is not a matter of viewpoint but the scientific process. The vaccine link to autism has been totally debunked. I suppose every scientific conclusion is up for re-examination but that is not what RFK is doing. He’s literally just digging up the fraudulent research that was already disproven.

This. It's not about feelings or debate, this has been thoroughly studied and debunked. Wakefield's original paper was based on complete junk (he was trying to sell his own vaccine and took a handful of samples at a birthday party that he didn't even process properly) and he lost his medical license for good reason.

Meanwhile kids have died preventable deaths because of these lies. RFK Jr. Has blood on his hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting how no one (like Fauci, Hotez, etc.) will debate RFK on the vaccine issue.

debate? it happens daily!! did you not watch his hearings?!?? one on one .. well i don’t think either side has proposed that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

More people on the autism spectrum are having kids than they did 30, 40, 50 years ago. Why? There's more acceptance of neurodivergent people, and it's more possible for someone with autism to have a successful career and make good money than it was in the 1970s. Tech industry, anyone?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

More people on the autism spectrum are having kids than they did 30, 40, 50 years ago. Why? There's more acceptance of neurodivergent people, and it's more possible for someone with autism to have a successful career and make good money than it was in the 1970s. Tech industry, anyone?

DP. This is a theory as much as vaccines cause autism is a theory lol. You’re telling me that in 1950 an autistic person couldn’t have a successful career working on an assembly line or at a steel mill?

[Anonymous]

I think there is more ASD now because
1) more people being assessed
2) diagnosis leads to $ treatment plans instead of just isolating the weird kid in the class
3) ASD people are helped to achieve their potential, work
And marry. If there is a genetic component this will increase ASD population compared to when they wrre the weird stockroom guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s like you people didn’t even listen to him speak. You just regurgitate whatever talking points have been assigned to you.

I've heard him speak quite enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

More people on the autism spectrum are having kids than they did 30, 40, 50 years ago. Why? There's more acceptance of neurodivergent people, and it's more possible for someone with autism to have a successful career and make good money than it was in the 1970s. Tech industry, anyone?

DP. This is a theory as much as vaccines cause autism is a theory lol. You’re telling me that in 1950 an autistic person couldn’t have a successful career working on an assembly line or at a steel mill?

I have a relative whom I believe to be autistic. I saw him as a child and growing up, and he had and still has many behaviors that fit into an autism diagnosis. Except no one really recognized that when he was a child, even though his parents took him to doctors for educational testing and evaluation. So he never received the types of supports a kid today would get. I believe he never developed to his full potential.

He never fully launched and never had a long term romantic relationship. In today’s world, he would have been diagnosed and been treated far differently at school. He probably would have had a better chance of a good job and a spouse if he’d received supports to help him relate better to other people.

So, yes, I definitely believe diagnosis can have a positive effect on people’s lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes of course that’s a fine question, which dedicated and meticulous scientists have been researching. What rfk jr means to say is he has rounded up some whackadoos to say it’s the MMR.

They are not "wackos" just because they might not align with your views. Honestly, I think our world is better for having people looking into this issue. When I had my kids in the mid 2000s, I remember being scared to death when I heard that autism rates were 1 in 220, but now it's around 1 in 30. Something is not right.

More people on the autism spectrum are having kids than they did 30, 40, 50 years ago. Why? There's more acceptance of neurodivergent people, and it's more possible for someone with autism to have a successful career and make good money than it was in the 1970s. Tech industry, anyone?

DP. This is a theory as much as vaccines cause autism is a theory lol. You’re telling me that in 1950 an autistic person couldn’t have a successful career working on an assembly line or at a steel mill?

Assembly lines and steel keels are both super loud so really impossible jobs for someone with sensory sensitivity that are common in autism. So those are bad examples.

Separately, I saw RFK jr argue an important legal case about 25 years ago, when he was an environmental lawyer. And it was immediately obvious that he was not very smart and not a good lawyer. This guy has coasted his whole life on his name causing destruction all around him. What a sad coda to his dad’s life.