Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like him or the administration. However, if he can take a different look at this, I am willing to listen to what they come up with. If it's garbage, we're no worse than we're now. If they find something, then it can be discussed on its own merits.

We know that there have been studies of individual vaccine safety, yes. They are properly done and well documented. However, nobody studied the effect of 20+ vaccinations before the age of 18 months. That's a really big question. Those born in 70s, 80s and 90s didn't have as many vaccination at this early an age.

The number of vaccinations in early childhood is a likely suspect. What's wrong with studying that?

Because it has already been exhaustively studied, so much so that it’s basically the only thing that’s been ruled out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't like him or the administration. However, if he can take a different look at this, I am willing to listen to what they come up with. If it's garbage, we're no worse than we're now. If they find something, then it can be discussed on its own merits.

We know that there have been studies of individual vaccine safety, yes. They are properly done and well documented. However, nobody studied the effect of 20+ vaccinations before the age of 18 months. That's a really big question. Those born in 70s, 80s and 90s didn't have as many vaccination at this early an age.

The number of vaccinations in early childhood is a likely suspect. What's wrong with studying that?

Anonymous wrote:He is a eugenicist, pure and simple. What is scary to me is the number of SN parents who like him. I get the challenges of SN parenting, but you are being sold snake oil and that is not the answer.

Anonymous wrote:here’s the issue w his conclusion.. he’s focusing on the more extreme cases and probably isn’t aware of an ever evolving spectrum that has captured diagnosis of many people in adulthood who have been incredibly successful
He has a sole focus but autism is a very wide spectrum. Honestly i have trouble with how a neuro type can be so incredibly broad. Our older teen was recently diagnosed and we still have an issue grasping it but understand the masking and the toll in takes leading to emotional disregulation. otherwise would never know

Anonymous wrote:here’s the issue w his conclusion.. he’s focusing on the more extreme cases and probably isn’t aware of an ever evolving spectrum that has captured diagnosis of many people in adulthood who have been incredibly successful
He has a sole focus but autism is a very wide spectrum. Honestly i have trouble with how a neuro type can be so incredibly broad. Our older teen was recently diagnosed and we still have an issue grasping it but understand the masking and the toll in takes leading to emotional disregulation. otherwise would never know

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree to disagree. Even level 1 requires an immense amount of resources which most parents can’t afford to provide and public resources are dwindling by the day. Autism at every level is rising and it is an absolute crisis for the country.

The definition of level 1 is literally not that.

Level 1 Autism with UMC Privileged Expectations of Going to an Ivy and Getting a Job on Wall Street and Marrying a Millionaire Heiress may require extensive support, but is not the DSM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Agree to disagree. Even level 1 requires an immense amount of resources which most parents can’t afford to provide and public resources are dwindling by the day. Autism at every level is rising and it is an absolute crisis for the country.

The definition of level 1 is literally not that.

Level 1 Autism with UMC Privileged Expectations of Going to an Ivy and Getting a Job on Wall Street and Marrying a Millionaire Heiress may require extensive support, but is not the DSM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Granted. Not trying to deny in any manner the research that is needed.

Just making the point that all the possible causes should be explored.

If you're the scientist PP, then you know small research companies are working on formulating vaccines on one or two forms of cancer. I am not a scientist by any means, but have glanced at information on their work. A few decades ago nobody would have said that maybe a vaccine can help prevent cancer. It's fair to say most of us welcome the possibility a vaccine might be able to prevent these cancers.

Causes that have been pretty thoroughly debunked should not “be explored” unless there is a solid new hypothesis. You are completely (willfully?) distorting what RFK is doing. He’s not acting in support of cutting edge science. He’s digging up researchers who were literally committing fraud. And on the other hand, gutting NIH and crippling the kind of innovative researchers who ask those kinds of questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know autism is at least in part genetic because various cousins have kids with autism.
So don't get me wrong. But it does seem like autism has exploded in numbers.

Why don't we keep an open mind and look at all the variables, not just the "accepted" causes?

Remember, Galileo proclaimed the earth was round and almost got burned at the stake for that heresy. He had the temerity to question the accepted flat earth belief of his time.

Not saying RFK Jr. is a Galileo, but at least let's explore potential environmental factors that might be causing susceptible individuals to develop autism.

Once again - if you can string together that set of words into sentences, you can also figure out that what RFK is saying is NOT a question founded in any sort of understanding of the current knowledge of autism. I don’t think anyone objects to research on how pollution affects fetuses for example. But Doge has gutted all of the capacity to do such research. RFK is not a doctor, not a scientist, and is making zero effort to foster legitimate inquiry.

+1

He has zero literally zero education in this matter. Who let's this crap come near their kid's medical decisions? No parent that is a good parent would allow someone with zero education have a say in vaccines.

HHS Secretaries don't issue vaccine recommendations. He is also not DOGE.

He’s doge’s stooge. They picked him because they knew he is an addled fool and they could gut HHS on his watch.

A more interesting question is how far in the mud Makary and Bhattacharya will go. They are contrarions but also actual medical doctors and scientists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Childhood vaccine rates in the USA have been dropping since 2020.

If vaccines caused autism shouldn’t we also see a drop in autism?


Cult of stupidy

It’d be too soon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Granted. Not trying to deny in any manner the research that is needed.

Just making the point that all the possible causes should be explored.

If you're the scientist PP, then you know small research companies are working on formulating vaccines on one or two forms of cancer. I am not a scientist by any means, but have glanced at information on their work. A few decades ago nobody would have said that maybe a vaccine can help prevent cancer. It's fair to say most of us welcome the possibility a vaccine might be able to prevent these cancers.

Causes that have been pretty thoroughly debunked should not “be explored” unless there is a solid new hypothesis. You are completely (willfully?) distorting what RFK is doing. He’s not acting in support of cutting edge science. He’s digging up researchers who were literally committing fraud. And on the other hand, gutting NIH and crippling the kind of innovative researchers who ask those kinds of questions.