In March, the American Department of Health and Social Services (HHS), now led by Robert F. Kennedy JR, announced a major study In the “link” demystified between vaccines and autism. Now Kennedy said that a final cause of increasing autism diagnosis would be announced in September. But this is not how scientific surveys work.
There is No scientific evidence To suggest a link between childhood vaccinations and the development of autism. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in major robust studies. However, an investigation in 2024 revealed that a Quarter of us responders continued to retain the conviction that the ROR vaccine (measles, mumps and rubella) is linked to autism.
Like the infectious diseases themselves, this myth turns out to be surprisingly difficult to eradicate.
The news that HHS provided for another study in this complete refuted theory was therefore encountered consternation Many scientists, who have also questioned the alleged decision to appoint David Geier – described as “long -term dismissed” and “skeptical vaccine” by The Washington Post – To direct it.
Now, during a cabinet meeting on Thursday, April 10, Kennedy would have Affirmed: “By September, we will know what caused the autism epidemic. And we will be able to eliminate these exhibitions. ” At a purely scientific level, there are a number of problems with this declaration.
Do autism rates increase?
First, the very characterization of autism as “epidemic” is controversial. This language can tend to evoke the idea of ”illness”, which Autism is not.
It is true that autism diagnostic rates have increased in recent years – a 2023 report Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have revealed that an 8 -year -old child is likely to be autistic, against a previous estimate of one in 44.
Experts are divided on the question of whether more diagnoses mean that there are really more autistic people now than other moments in our history, or if this indicates a problem of overdiagnosis.
In countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, awareness of autism and neurodiversity in general has improved over the past two decades. It is a good thing if it leads to a greater acceptance of autistic people in society, or allows people who may have missed support as a child to seek a diagnosis that provides them with self -acceptance and access to housing Later in life.
With greater awareness and more and more people looking for autism assessments, however, has just known whether people receive diagnoses where, over the past years, they may not have reached the clinical threshold.
This is increased by the fact that the Clinical guidelines Used to diagnose autism has evolved over the years. An example of this is the deletion of “Asperger syndrome“As an official diagnosis. Although newly diagnosed people will no longer receive this label, there are those who choose to continue to identify with this.
Dr. Conor Davidson, champion of autism at the Royal College of Psychiatricists of the United Kingdom, discussed the possible ramifications of the overdiagnosis in a blog. A consequence could be that people with certain mental health conditions are poorly diagnosed as autistic and therefore do not receive specific treatments that could benefit them.
Others have raised concerns about unreliable information Being exploited on social networks, which can lead people to diagnose themselves wrongly with autism. However, any discussion on this subject must also include an assessment of the often long waiting times for official evaluations, which can lead people to seek other sources of information out of despair.
Taken at nominal value, the increase in autism diagnostics can be considered a negative or worrying thing; However, the figures alone do not reflect the experiences of autistic people, the fact that many plan to obtain their diagnosis a positive step and the various complex reasons for which these figures increase.
And moreover, many autistic people have argued that the search for a sort of “eliminating” autism is intrinsically offensive. Rather than something to be feared, they say, autism and other neurodivergent conditions should rather be accepted and celebrated.
“(If) everyone is different, (then) it must be due to the fact that the amount is greater than the parties, that the diversity of human neurocognitive capacities is an integral part of the survival of the species and our evolution,” said Dr. Tony Lloyd, CEO of the TDAH Foundation, says Iflcouce.
What could RFK JR mean by “exhibitions”?
Just like many research time has become refuted the concept of link between autism and vaccines, many experts have conducted studies to try to understand what causes autism.
We do not yet have a final answer, and we may never do it. Autism is complex and heterogeneous, and is probably caused by a mixture of factors.
A promising avenue was genetic research. A recent study revealed that the rare DNA sequences transmitted from our Neanderthal ancestors occur at higher rates in people with autistic people, on average, than non -Aboriginal people. So far, it is not known exactly how these variants of genes could play a role in autism, if this is the case.
Continuing the theme of the old genetic material, certain research has suggested that Endogenous retrovirus could be involved. The sequences derived from the virus of the ancient retroviruses, the ancestors of modern viruses such as HIV, have become integrated into the genomes of our human history and were transmitted by the generations. We now think that these “fossils” are made up about 8% Human genome and their impact is still not entirely understood.
A Study published in 2020 has identified 102 genes associated with the development of autism, using more than 35,000 genetic samples. Certain changes that increase the chances that someone be autistic may be inherited, and others can occur spontaneously. Again, this highlights the complexity of the problem in question.
Like Joseph Buxbaum, director of Seaver Autism Center, said it Iflcouce At the time, “the research -based research was complicated now because easy things have been determined.”
According to the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), increasing attention is paid to possible environmental factors which could also be involved. These include exposure to certain pesticides and air pollution.
“But these factors alone cause autism alone,” said Niehs. “On the contrary, they seem to increase the probability of a child to develop autism when combined with genetic factors.”
All scientific evidence to date therefore fly in the face of claims – largely by anti -taxxers – that certain ingredients or compounds are causative of autism.
President Trump recently made comments that the flames of this type of speculation. As indicated by CnnAmong others, the president said, “If you can find this answer where you stop taking something, you stop eating something or maybe it’s a blow, but something causes it.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5N2EFJSEG4
Hoping a simple answer to a complex scientific question is one thing; Entering an investigation while waiting you will certainly find it – and on the defined date – is another.
How scientific investigations are supposed to operate
A scientific investigation begins with what we call a “null hypothesis». This is a declaration capturing the idea that there is no difference between the conditions or the populations studied.
In a study to discover if the Ror vaccine causes autism, the null hypothesis would be something like “autism rates are not higher in people who have received the ROR vaccine”.
The purpose of your survey is therefore to carry out experiences that will allow you to test this hypothesis and collect data. It is only if you have enough data that point to the opposite direction that you reject the null hypothesis, and the scientists and the statisticians have established benchmarks This must be reached before this may be the case.
All this to say, unless you reach these bearings, you cannot assume that the null hypothesis is not true. When scientists find new exciting results, what they really celebrate is that their reference hypothesis is badly turned out.
What science should not be about to participate with a preconceived idea and seek only data that prove You are right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CBV1FNP7E4
Hopefully this illustrates why it is scientifically suspect when someone makes a statement as “we will know what caused the epidemic of autism” before an investigation was really finished.
It should also be said that this whole process does not really work on a strict deadline. Scientists carefully plan their surveys – they must generally be part of the process of obtaining funding for their research. But even the best implemented plans can be derailed.
As people involved in life research and health sciences know it too well, living systems can often throw curved bullets in the mixture. If the process of achieving science concerns discovery, it is in a way that you might encounter something unexpected. And that is why a declaration as daring as the results of a study being defined “by September” is questionable.