Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Hey, are our vaccinated children passing Hepatitis B around like the unvaccinated children around the world? No? Well, we should stop vaccinating them. Obviously they don't need it."

Absolute ninny logic.

The schedule calls for vaccinating the newborn against Hep B on the day of birth. Now that's ninny logic.

Why is it “ninny logic” when the mother can pass Hepatitis B to her newborn during the birth?

Why are you pushing for that in mothers that are Hep B negative?

It's like a religion with you. inject-inject-Inject. Screw your sacred cows.

Meanwhile, countries like Japan, German, Denmark and others have far less burdensome vaccine schedules than the U.S. vaccine schedule.

lol ok genius. What other countries have is endemic Hep B. The US took action to stop that from happening here. https://www.gavi.org/news/media-room/chinas-dramatic-fall-hepatitis-b-infections

The makers of Tylenol immediately appease the dictator—actual science be damned.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

3. If liberalization of diagnostic criteria accounted for the increase in autism rates, we’d expect the fastest growing group to be the middle aged or seniors. In reality, it’s children whose ASD rate is rising fastest.

It's almost like there is an entire infrastructure to repetitively test children and keep them in a setting where they are forced to interact with each other, and where if the child falling behind -- unlike for adults, when you are on your own -- there is another entire infrastructure with legal requirements for supports to be given and then reassessed.

Oh yeah. It's called school.

I am an autism parent. You are trying to playfully dunk on a deeply painful subject that you know nothing about. You do not get diagnosed via school. It is of course possible—even common—for symptoms to be noticed in school, but if those symptoms are that obvious, the autism was never subtle enough to stand or fall with the particulars of the DSM edition being employed (to say nothing of the fact that the diagnostic criteria were tightened, not loosened).

I am sorry for the challenges that come with an autistic child.

If you don't think that literal federal requirements to assess and make specific plans mean there is more diagnosis, I don't know what to tell you. Someone can lead you to information, but they can't help you understand it.

A person who can't function well at work generally gets fired, is underemployed, or just never gets hired. The exact same behaviors, challenges and mannerisms in a school environment (which cannot just "fire" him, but has a legal requirement to do something) is many times more likely to lead to a diagnosis and support plan.

Not PP
1. Average age of diagnosis has gotten younger over time. Now it is currently 5 which means a substantial number of kids are diagnosed before school.

And, over time, we have developed the FACE program, various state EIs (early intervention), the Easy Access Autism Screening Program providing a free screening assessment over the phone in 10 to 30 minutes, and pre-K with a specific goal of identifying children at need early.

2. IDEA was passed in the late 70s. Why would that mean an increase in diagnosis in the last twenty years would be due to school requirements?

IDEA implementation changes over time, just like all of medicine, and politics, and funding, and support programs. In 1975, the DSM-II was still in the reference.

3. An educational “diagnosis” (I assume you mean iep category) and a medical diagnosis are not the same thing. The studies that show an increase are based on medical diagnosis.

Do you ... think an educational assessment exists in a vacuum? That a parent told their child isn't functioning normally in school and needs special plans is then going to, what, say to themselves "well, that last thing I'm going to do is talk to a professional about this, like my child's pediatrician or a psychologist?"

4. Profound autism is increasing as well which is not something that would’ve been missed in a prior generation

Also as someone with an autistic kid on the milder end of the spectrum it’s amusing to me that you think that schools are rushing to diagnose kids with autism. They have bigger fish to fry.

Funny how often I read on this site that schools are just trying to get more money out of it. I guess we can have it both ways.

Everything that I have read from people in the actual field is that the increase in autism rates is diagnostic criteria changes and some other factor that they aren’t sure about yet. So not sure why you are condescendingly telling this mom misinformation.

It is, but those diagnostic criteria don't exist in a vacuum. People use them. When the criteria change, what is looked for in early intervention changes, and what is identified as possible supports broadens. That's the way all this works.

And come on, if anyone thinks that adults would be more likely to be diagnosed has never worked with the current health care system or with the modern workforce. Adults fall through the cracks all the time. I'm glad to work with kids, because at least we can patch together help. There is little to no help for adults with disabilities, whether they have a formal diagnosis or not. They are mostly left to fend for themselves, and I cannot believe you both don't know this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

3. If liberalization of diagnostic criteria accounted for the increase in autism rates, we’d expect the fastest growing group to be the middle aged or seniors. In reality, it’s children whose ASD rate is rising fastest.

It's almost like there is an entire infrastructure to repetitively test children and keep them in a setting where they are forced to interact with each other, and where if the child falling behind -- unlike for adults, when you are on your own -- there is another entire infrastructure with legal requirements for supports to be given and then reassessed.

Oh yeah. It's called school.

I am an autism parent. You are trying to playfully dunk on a deeply painful subject that you know nothing about. You do not get diagnosed via school. It is of course possible—even common—for symptoms to be noticed in school, but if those symptoms are that obvious, the autism was never subtle enough to stand or fall with the particulars of the DSM edition being employed (to say nothing of the fact that the diagnostic criteria were tightened, not loosened).

I am sorry for the challenges that come with an autistic child.

If you don't think that literal federal requirements to assess and make specific plans mean there is more diagnosis, I don't know what to tell you. Someone can lead you to information, but they can't help you understand it.

A person who can't function well at work generally gets fired, is underemployed, or just never gets hired. The exact same behaviors, challenges and mannerisms in a school environment (which cannot just "fire" him, but has a legal requirement to do something) is many times more likely to lead to a diagnosis and support plan.

Not PP
1. Average age of diagnosis has gotten younger over time. Now it is currently 5 which means a substantial number of kids are diagnosed before school.
2. IDEA was passed in the late 70s. Why would that mean an increase in diagnosis in the last twenty years would be due to school requirements?
3. An educational “diagnosis” (I assume you mean iep category) and a medical diagnosis are not the same thing. The studies that show an increase are based on medical diagnosis.
4. Profound autism is increasing as well which is not something that would’ve been missed in a prior generation

Also as someone with an autistic kid on the milder end of the spectrum it’s amusing to me that you think that schools are rushing to diagnose kids with autism. They have bigger fish to fry.

Everything that I have read from people in the actual field is that the increase in autism rates is diagnostic criteria changes and some other factor that they aren’t sure about yet. So not sure why you are condescendingly telling this mom misinformation.

When did universal pre-k start?
The more young children are exposed to other adults without their parents present in an environment other than home the more flags go up.
Especially when developmental milestone assessments are part of the program.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

3. If liberalization of diagnostic criteria accounted for the increase in autism rates, we’d expect the fastest growing group to be the middle aged or seniors. In reality, it’s children whose ASD rate is rising fastest.

It's almost like there is an entire infrastructure to repetitively test children and keep them in a setting where they are forced to interact with each other, and where if the child falling behind -- unlike for adults, when you are on your own -- there is another entire infrastructure with legal requirements for supports to be given and then reassessed.

Oh yeah. It's called school.

I am an autism parent. You are trying to playfully dunk on a deeply painful subject that you know nothing about. You do not get diagnosed via school. It is of course possible—even common—for symptoms to be noticed in school, but if those symptoms are that obvious, the autism was never subtle enough to stand or fall with the particulars of the DSM edition being employed (to say nothing of the fact that the diagnostic criteria were tightened, not loosened).

I am sorry for the challenges that come with an autistic child.

If you don't think that literal federal requirements to assess and make specific plans mean there is more diagnosis, I don't know what to tell you. Someone can lead you to information, but they can't help you understand it.

A person who can't function well at work generally gets fired, is underemployed, or just never gets hired. The exact same behaviors, challenges and mannerisms in a school environment (which cannot just "fire" him, but has a legal requirement to do something) is many times more likely to lead to a diagnosis and support plan.

Not PP
1. Average age of diagnosis has gotten younger over time. Now it is currently 5 which means a substantial number of kids are diagnosed before school.
2. IDEA was passed in the late 70s. Why would that mean an increase in diagnosis in the last twenty years would be due to school requirements?
3. An educational “diagnosis” (I assume you mean iep category) and a medical diagnosis are not the same thing. The studies that show an increase are based on medical diagnosis.
4. Profound autism is increasing as well which is not something that would’ve been missed in a prior generation

Also as someone with an autistic kid on the milder end of the spectrum it’s amusing to me that you think that schools are rushing to diagnose kids with autism. They have bigger fish to fry.

Everything that I have read from people in the actual field is that the increase in autism rates is diagnostic criteria changes and some other factor that they aren’t sure about yet. So not sure why you are condescendingly telling this mom misinformation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Hey, are our vaccinated children passing Hepatitis B around like the unvaccinated children around the world? No? Well, we should stop vaccinating them. Obviously they don't need it."

Absolute ninny logic.

The schedule calls for vaccinating the newborn against Hep B on the day of birth. Now that's ninny logic.

Why is it “ninny logic” when the mother can pass Hepatitis B to her newborn during the birth?

Why are you pushing for that in mothers that are Hep B negative?

It's like a religion with you. inject-inject-Inject. Screw your sacred cows.

Meanwhile, countries like Japan, German, Denmark and others have far less burdensome vaccine schedules than the U.S. vaccine schedule.

I see-you are you worried about that age old concern “too much liquid into babies.”

DP. Just because Trump is an idiot doesn’t negate what this person is saying. Many other nations do not require hep B or varicella. Vaccines are overall a good thing but literally everything in life has risks (not to say that autism is a risk but certainly people can and do have adverse reactions to these things) so the question is do the risks outweigh the benefits and why is that the case in the United States and not other places?

Blaming Tylenol for autism is like walking into a hardware store and asking “Which of these screws cause furniture?”

^^"in Cuba"

Hey, you know how Trump said that there's virtually no autism is Cuba?

Trump says Cuba has ‘virtually no autism.’ That’s news to Cuban doctors

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/23/americas/trump-autism-cuba-intl-latam

For years the island’s state-run medical system has operated clinics to treat Cubans with autism and carried out campaigns to raise awareness of the neurological developmental disorder. Cuba even offers specialized autism therapies such as swimming with dolphins for foreigners seeking treatment who can pay in badly needed hard currency.

Liars gonna lie so hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is RKFJr's "Tylenol(TM) causes autism" just a shakedown for extortion money from the company?

Is that why he's blaming the brand name and not the common name of acetaminophen?

I think he has to say Tylenol because he can't pronounce Acetaminophen

Where’s Tylenol with their “stop saying our name just because you can’t pronounce acetaminophen “ letter?

Oh, there's a letter being drafted at their legal office. Not sure it's going directly to Trump, though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

3. If liberalization of diagnostic criteria accounted for the increase in autism rates, we’d expect the fastest growing group to be the middle aged or seniors. In reality, it’s children whose ASD rate is rising fastest.

It's almost like there is an entire infrastructure to repetitively test children and keep them in a setting where they are forced to interact with each other, and where if the child falling behind -- unlike for adults, when you are on your own -- there is another entire infrastructure with legal requirements for supports to be given and then reassessed.

Oh yeah. It's called school.

I am an autism parent. You are trying to playfully dunk on a deeply painful subject that you know nothing about. You do not get diagnosed via school. It is of course possible—even common—for symptoms to be noticed in school, but if those symptoms are that obvious, the autism was never subtle enough to stand or fall with the particulars of the DSM edition being employed (to say nothing of the fact that the diagnostic criteria were tightened, not loosened).

I am sorry for the challenges that come with an autistic child.

If you don't think that literal federal requirements to assess and make specific plans mean there is more diagnosis, I don't know what to tell you. Someone can lead you to information, but they can't help you understand it.

A person who can't function well at work generally gets fired, is underemployed, or just never gets hired. The exact same behaviors, challenges and mannerisms in a school environment (which cannot just "fire" him, but has a legal requirement to do something) is many times more likely to lead to a diagnosis and support plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, in a few years, insurance companies will deny all autism coverage by saying they shouldn’t have to pay for treatments because mom intentionally gave her kid autism by taking Tylenol. Mothers of autistic kids will be pariahs.

What will they do with me? I have fraternal twins. One has autism and the other is neurotypical. Did all of the Tylenol only go to one baby?

I’m also an autism parent. I hope your family is doing well and that you all are hanging in there. I say this with respect and compassion, but it’s odd to me that your experience leads you to parody people positing an environmental component. Plenty of people will say that autism “is genetic,” insinuating (or even outright saying) that whether a child has autism follows ineluctably from that child’s genes, when, in fact, the experience of twins (including monozygotic twins) shows that it surely is much more complicated than that.

You’re making my point. We haven’t pinpointed the exact cause(s) of autism. It’s so much more complicated than whether mom took Tylenol during pregnancy. They have no peer reviewed research that backs up their premise. This press conference was a bunch of misleading malarkey.

There are women who are pregnant right now, who took Tylenol yesterday or last week or last month and these nincompoops are frightening those women unnecessarily. What the Trump administration is doing is so wrong.

You don’t need to pinpoint causes to discuss them. There are surely multiple causes. They should all be identified. I’m sure this is frightening to some parents, but if it is scientifically valid, it should come out.

The way to do that is through the long conversation of research and publication, not by a financially-invested politician declaring "truths" by fiat which have no real support in the actual research. And not by declaration of a POTUS who knows so little about what he's discussing that he can't even get the basic words right.

Like how about a study of 2.5 million children over a 24 year period?!!!! The Swedish study that debunks what all was said today.


“Swedish researchers analysed data from nearly 2.5 million children born over a 24-year period to compare how siblings fared when their mothers used paracetamol (what Tylenol called in rest of world-only US and Japan say acetaminophen).

They found that paracetamol use during pregnancy was not linked to children’s risk of autism, intellectual disabilities, or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

“This suggests that other factors, such as genetic or underlying maternal health conditions, may better explain the findings,” said Dr Hannah Kirk, a senior lecturer in the Turner Institute for Brain and Mental Health at Monash University in Australia.”

You’re right that there is at least one study pointing to no association. There are many others that point to an association. That is par for the course. A person who accepts one study and ignores those that go the other way is not a scientist; he is a partisan.

A person who doesn’t look at the quality of the various studies is partisan.

That’s correct. You are simply assuming the Swedish study is higher quality than the others.

But it is. Do you not know about the scoring system for quality of evidence?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213398423002713
Introduction to the GRADE tool for rating certainty in evidence and recommendations

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Hey, are our vaccinated children passing Hepatitis B around like the unvaccinated children around the world? No? Well, we should stop vaccinating them. Obviously they don't need it."

Absolute ninny logic.

The schedule calls for vaccinating the newborn against Hep B on the day of birth. Now that's ninny logic.

Why is it “ninny logic” when the mother can pass Hepatitis B to her newborn during the birth?

Why are you pushing for that in mothers that are Hep B negative?

It's like a religion with you. inject-inject-Inject. Screw your sacred cows.

Meanwhile, countries like Japan, German, Denmark and others have far less burdensome vaccine schedules than the U.S. vaccine schedule.

I see-you are you worried about that age old concern “too much liquid into babies.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Hey, are our vaccinated children passing Hepatitis B around like the unvaccinated children around the world? No? Well, we should stop vaccinating them. Obviously they don't need it."

Absolute ninny logic.

The schedule calls for vaccinating the newborn against Hep B on the day of birth. Now that's ninny logic.

Why is it “ninny logic” when the mother can pass Hepatitis B to her newborn during the birth?

Why are you pushing for that in mothers that are Hep B negative?

It's like a religion with you. inject-inject-Inject. Screw your sacred cows.

Meanwhile, countries like Japan, German, Denmark and others have far less burdensome vaccine schedules than the U.S. vaccine schedule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on guys. I think we can all look back at our childhood and realize that we knew several people who would probably be diagnosed with Autism, based on today’s standards. That’s one reason for an increase in diagnosis. My dad had two very specific interests his entire life and had incredible knowledge of those things. His sister was very rigid with her routines and brands of products she used. I am not diagnosing based on just that, but it is an example of something that would be considered a sign by today’s standards.

An interesting theory I heard as another cause for the increase - the growing STEM field and more women entering STEM careers. More people with mild Autism are meeting through work and college and are getting married. Their kids are more likely to have it and possibly more severe. I don’t have a lick of evidence for that. Just something I heard and thought was interesting. I am not saying that’s a bad thing at all.

Also, if you look at the long list of Autistic people who contributed greatly to this world - I don’t know that it is something that needs to be cured…Einstein, Isaac Newton, Michelangelo, etc. Like what we have done with “gifted” people, we need to focus on giving them what they need to thrive. Obviously, this is different for Level 3 Autism. They need more care and support, and we need to continue learning how to lessen their symptoms. But I don’t think “taking away Autism” is what we need.

No serious person thinks this accounts for the increase. Moreover, media presentations of benign manifestations of the condition obscure that the condition is profoundly disabling for a huge share of the kids who have it. A substantial minority of those kids who have it cannot speak. To act like it is just pathologizing the quirky is simply wrong on the facts and lacks compassion to those who have been profoundly disabled by a condition that many elites are curiously hostile to studying with any scientific rigor.

DP. Many people think this is contributing factor.

“One indication that the method is imperfect is the fact that autism rates vary dramatically between states. The prevalence in Colorado, for instance, is 1 in 93 children, whereas in New Jersey it is 1 in 41. It is unlikely that the rates naturally vary that much between states, Fombonne says. Instead, the difference probably reflects varying levels of autism awareness and of services offered in those states.”

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-real-reasons-autism-rates-are-up-in-the-u-s/#:~:text=In%20fact%2C%20the%20trend%20has,services%20offered%20in%20those%20states.

This quote refers to variation as a function of geography, not of time. Moreover, the differences in diagnostic rates between states is much smaller than the differences in diagnostic rates over time.