RFK jr says he will reveal cause of autism?

[Parisfranc]

Has anyone seen this?

He claims he will reveal what it is in September.

Not sure I believe it to be honest and I have a feeling whatever answer he gives won't be definitive but will blame a whole range of possible things. I've done a Google search for those who haven't heard anything about it and there are lots of articles but I always see people get attacked based on which source they give so don't know which ones to link to?

I don't mean to upset.

And I agree it is a troubling line of conversation. Highly taboo. For very good reasons. We do not want to have such conversations whilst simultaneously denigrating the worthiness of life of those with disabilities who already face tremendous discrimination, and dehumanising rhetoric even in a very liberal compassionate society in 2025.

However the reality is, there is a big burden to nature no longer being a breaker on the passing on of disadvantageous predisposive genes.

There is also an accompanying suffering for the children and as in the case I mention even generational burden
.
I had my children young. I think now as a much more mature woman being as ill as I am if I could take the brain I have now and put it in my 20 something year old body, I would really have chosen to not have children. One of my sons is already expressing one of my illnesses and I feel horrible about it.

These conversations need to be had. Science is great. Technologies like Crispr are fantastic, but it cannot always provide cures where avoidance perhaps could be better

And this is why people are flocking to Reform. Sneering comments like this, dismissing people’s genuine concerns about huge immigration levels and the effects on social cohesion and infrastructure. Why the need to link it to RFK Jr?

@BadDinner am frankly appalled by your comment. Both my children, I and my sisters and a half brother are all on the spectrum. Each of us have had struggles, but I would NEVER EVER wish that any of my family had not been born. My DC exect to go to university - their expression of ASD is such that they excel in their area of interests even if they need social support or scaffolding. My half-brother may never be able to hold down a job, get a qualification, but he is very much loved by his mother and the family. My sister runs a very successful business and is an ambassador for a national charity within her specialism, though she is very much supported by a doting and patient husband to do so. Seeing the world from their perspectives gives us insight into our own experience of the world. We are all enriched by their presence in our lives.

Everyone, NT or ND, has their struggles. Life is not easy for any one, especially in 2025. Not all people on the spectrum would consider themselves ‘disabled’ - for many it simply means they navigate the world along a different path to NT people. The idea that such people shouldn’t be here, that we can chose whether they get to live or are eugenically expunged is horrific… who would Einstein have been if he had not been on the spectrum, the likes of Anthony Hopkins and, it is thought likely, the genius of Mozart? Much of our art and science was possible because of the diversity of cognition, imagination and creativity that arises from divergent minds. As a population, we would be the poorer for their absence.

You think he’s going to give some unbiased report on the findings??? Please.

Hes a rabidly insane anti-vaxxer, nothing else. You shouldn’t even be approaching this topic from a place of balance because there is NONE to be found in the Trump administration.

I feel like you’re missing a broader point, that he is anti ALL vaccinations basically. When people in the ‘greatest’ country in the world start dying of measles and polio and god knows what else, the American people have no recourse and another 3 years of this rabid insane distruction.

This thread is about autism specifically and I don't believe autistic people are a burden or that they have disadvantageous genes. I believe they have differences that don't make sense to our neurotypical society but that doesn't make them wrong. We don't actually live in a liberal and compassionate society either. It's better than it used to be 50 years ago but there's a hell of a long way to go.

Yours is an interesting take, for sure. You seem to be suggesting that rather than change society to accept and support disabled people, we just selectively breed to get rid of disabled people and that's somehow... better for disabled people because then they won't feel like a burden?

How about we just don't make disabled people feel like a burden. Everyone wins.

I think it's highly unlikely for the simple reason the man doesn't trust the scientific process, without which no one will ever be able to explain the causes of anything let alone a highly complex, multi factored condition such as autism.

No science, no explanation possible

The 'cause of autism' will be something where RFK has a grifter mate who sells something that can 'fix it' and/or it will be something the GOP regime wants to ban.

Women immunising their kids absolutely.

I appreciate your views and completely understand where you are coming from 100%

But out now, back later

He isn't a scientist and hasn't spent years doing Research, he gets his information from conspiracy theorists . Of course whatever he says will be complete nonsense

When I attempted to become a nurse (yes, I have limited credentials, if any) twenty plus years ago, and was trying to read research papers to inform my evidence based practice, I was warned to be careful when doing so. Reason being, sometimes reaearchers are being paid by certain for-profit conglomerates and organisations to prove something they already peddle as fact. Therefore, don't take too seriously a paper saying smoking isn't that bad for you when the research is being sponsored by BAT, or that there are benefits to weight loss if you drink six cups of coffee a day, if it's been sponsored by Nescafé.

This research isn't going to be independent. This research will prove what RFK jnr wants it to prove, because he's sponsoring it! The data will be skewed towards the conclusion he's paid for. Scientific research can be impartial but very often it's not.

Look at the sample size, who's paying for it, who approved the research, what ethical considerations were made before commencing the research...all this stuff matters.

https://www.psypost.org/new-study-suggests-breathing-polluted-air-can-increase-risk-of-depression-anxiety-and-autism/

Maybe he will make his announcement and with it say the Trump administration will be banning fuel burning cars in 2030. 😂

I don't believe he will but if he did announce some miracle cure for autism or a way to counter it- that really works. I'd give it my son in a hearbeat. He is severly disabled by his autism. It wouldn't even be a question.

Hopefully one day there will be something that could help those like my son. As a parent why would I want my child to live with a severe disability if there was any chance of him not being. Maybe whatever this announcement is will be a step to that or at least start conversations around it.

I agree. Some of the dismissive attitudes are really sad. It's like people don't even want it looked into.

He knows what causes it. Problem is he is batshit, so how much value should the rest of us put on what he ‘knows’. I say none.

I do know vaccines don’t cause autism because that link is the most insanely researched topic ever and … nothing. I think that makes RFK quite disappointed. Sometimes reality is disappointing.

It’s probably being looked into all the time by serious scientists and researchers. They haven’t got there yet. When they do I’ll be over the moon.

But RFK has power and opinions and money.

Thats not to be confused with education, years of experience, and a reputable standing in the scientific community.

My dog’s farts are more scientifically informed than RFKs views.

I think for some people it's become an identity or something to opt in to then for others it's a severe disability.
I'm glad he's asking questions and raising the conversation. It needs more investigation especially around those who regress and have profound disabilities. It isn't good enough to shrug it off.

I think part of the problem is that autism is an umbrella dx with many conditions and presentations falling under it. The expansion of the dx to include other presentations doesn't help in terms of pinpointing cause.

In regards to vaccines (donning my hard hat). Vaccines do cause injury to a minority of people (regarded as so small that the protections offered to many outweigh the risk to the few) but some vaccines do have encephalitis as a possible side effect and there is research as to if some people are misdiagnosed with autism rather than encephalitis.

@LittleYellowQueen I am afraid I would make an absolutely terrible farmer even with ADHD, my circadian rhythm naturally runs several hours later than average so getting up at 5am would be no good, my sensory issues make being outside torture 90% of the time and I struggle with repetitive activity as I find it so boring I experience intrusive sleep.

In the context of natural selection, these things would be either neutral or disadvantageous. Nothing to do with assuming it's a negative. I don't actually believe that ND people all coped perfectly fine before the modern era, though. There is too much history to suggest otherwise, unfortunately. Particularly presentations of autism where the person has very high support needs, but even ADHD was described as a "defect of moral control" in 1902 and there are other descriptions which match it going back to the 1700s, all in the context of it being some kind of disorder.

I agree there are aspects of modern life which are especially difficult for ND people but TBH they tend not to be great for anybody. Some people say that ND people are the "canaries in the coal mine" of modern life, alerting us to the unhealthy expectations placed on all of us.

But it IS being looked into. It's a major area of research and study. No idea why RFK Jr thinks it is not.

The innocence of childhood 1/5

The innocence of childhood 2/5

The innocence of childhood 3/5

The innocence of childhood 4/5

The innocence of childhood 5/5