Dom, as a mother to an autistic child, I really appreciate the nuance and clarity in this piece. It’s refreshing and honestly, a bit of a relief to see someone take the time to gently dismantle the fear-based narrative that so often surrounds autism, especially from figures with large platforms.
The reminder that language builds realities really hit home. I’ve seen firsthand how framing autism as a tragedy can harm not just how others treat my child, but how my child sees himself. That matters more than people realise. I also really valued the breakdown of the historical and diagnostic shifts...something many people aren’t aware of, yet it’s essential to understanding the so-called "rise" in diagnoses.
Thank you for writing this with such care. It makes a difference.
Oh Salwa, as always, your words touch me so. This is such a rewarding comment to read and makes all the time spent writing a piece like this feel COMPLETELY WORTH IT (yes, with capital letters)! <3
This piece is excellently written and clearly presented. Others here have already expressed the multitude of ways this post is helpful. I merely say great work, thank you for writing this and you got a restack out of me for it as a result.
You're welcome. I also want to give credit and a properly due shout-out to Salwa for bringing this piece to my attention. I came here from her restack, and I'm glad for her pointing me to it.
I really appreciate what you wrote here. I appreciate your pointing out how to question people and things that seem authoritative. I also appreciate the reasons why people think the number of people on the spectrum has risen. Similar stats could support a rise in the number of people with trauma diagnoses, when it’s only an issue of recognition. Autism spectrum runs in my family and has been undiagnosed and misdiagnosed. I’m grateful for the time and effort you took here.
Hello Mary, thank you so much for taking the time to read this article and leave such a kind, motivating comment. It means a lot to me. I’m so glad you found the article useful in some way. And you’re righ, if we were to look at a number of psychological conditions through simplistic comparisons, we would indeed see a lot of “epidemics.”
You did a great job! Learning to read/listen with a critical mindset and asking questions are so important, not only in political contexts, but in research environments as well which unfortunately isn’t always as “clean” and unbiased as it claims to be! 😂
My daughter is a PhD student so we have a lot of these discussions. 😊
Thank you for your well-written piece on autism that refutes Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s misleading speech. Your piece is so necessary. In particular, it educates and informs about the progress that science and medicine have made over the past 50 years. But what’s scarier to me is the thought that there are parents out there who will listen to RFK Jr. and will not get their kids the care they need. I love the way you can describe RFK’s false claims as being “from another time, another place.” I remember when people claimed that ADHD was caused by red dye #2 about 50 years ago
Humbly, gently as possible while not being someone who is in any way shape, or form a medically relevent source of information, but from the humble lens of an everyday citizen, I was under the impression that ADHD isn't "caused" by anything, but rather a product of birth. Under that lens, red dye is in fact linked to changes in behavior in people with ADHD. Not red dye #2 specificially, but it's easy to see how as knowledge improved we transitioned from saying it's the cause of ADHD, to now thinking is effecting behaviorial changes in those who have it.
ADHD has a complex etiology. I think I wrote an article. I will send you a link. I don't think eliminating red dye #2 from your diet is a bad thing; however, in my opinion, it's best to eat less processed food with artificial colors in general. The problem is that when people are given the impression that the leading cause of ADHD is red dye number 2, and removing that from their child's diet will solve the problem, it becomes very misleading. The brains of people with ADHD are different than those who do not have the neurodivergency. The etiology is complex, and you are right, the birth process is one piece that has been identified. People with ADHD continuously need various services to learn to work around it and live with it to function. To me, after decades of research to reduce AdHd as caused by red dye #2 or the Autism Spectrum, etiology is simply that environmental toxins are naive. ASD is complex and is referred to as a spectrum because some people are quite impaired.. The concern is that money would be taken away from services that improve the quality of life for people on the spectrum. Also, there may be a lack of compassion for different types of neurobiology, and people on the spectrum might not be accepted for their talents. Still, they may be treated harshly when they don't behave like typical people..
Case and point to my "everyday citizen" would be that I have never before seen the word etiology. I had to look it up. Smart people have quite a few words for saying something else ;) I have a insatiable appitite for knowledge but realistically, I'll ever only be able to absorb a small fraction of the information my mind desires.
As such, I thank you for the more in depth response. I likely should have kept my comment to myself to begin with, as I knew there was a chance you didn't make your comment out of hand without already knowing what I had said. I also find the mistreatment of such individuals to be of the unmistakable sign of self esteem issues.
I worked at a facility called Hopewell Center in my home town for a few years where my job was to "supervise" a group of individuals with developmental issues running the gamut from mental illness to mental disorders and everything in between. Even now, after some twenty years gone from the job I feel a protectiveness for those less able to protect themselves.
It is always appropriate, to my way of thinking, to use whatever word comes to mind. It's a failing on my part for not knowing the meaning of the word, not yours for using it.
I dont ever think you should keep a comment to yourself. How will all of us learn from each other.You are right that there are certain foods that are not good for us. But the more I work as a therapist i learn most human situations are complecated.
I dont ever think you should keep a comment to yourself. How will all of us learn from each other.You are right that there are certain foods that are not good for us. But the more I work as a therapist i learn most human situations are complecated.
It’s always so nice hearing from you. Thank you for your thoughtful words. I’m grateful you found the piece meaningful, especially in highlighting the scientific progress we’ve made over the past decades. And yes, I share your concern: the idea that parents might be swayed by such misleading claims and hold back from seeking needed care is deeply worrying.
Thank you also for bringing in that historical perspective too. It tells us of how these kinds of narratives have echoed across time.
“How do you know when you don’t know?” This is probably THE number one thing we have to focus on as a society. The world is full of RFKs with various platforms and it is so hard to know what’s true and what isn’t. Education is key here! How do we teach the masses what critical thinking looks and feels like in the age of misinformation?
I’m so glad you raised this! I agree completely that this is one of the biggest questions we face today. Education is absolutely key, but I think it’s not just about formal education; it’s also about fostering a mindset of curiosity, humility, and a willingness to sit with uncertainty. Critical thinking isn’t just a skill, it’s also a habit, and it’s one we need to intentionally encourage, especially in this age of constant information flow.
You might have just given me the idea for my next post (yay!) and I’ll be sure to credit you for inspiring it! Thank you so much for adding such a thoughtful reflection to the conversation.
I love it! I’m certain I’ll be writing about this at some point as well. I teach a class about being a responsible scientific consumer. It’s a topic near and dear to my heart
I’m so pleased to see you here in my comment feed :) thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I completely agree: RFK Jr.’s manipulation of facts to suit his narrative is deeply concerning (and I've noticed it's on a broad range of topics!)
As is my way, I tend to comment as I read with 2 tabs opened to facilitate this. Hopefully, I'll not get a surprise twist somewhere along the way, because that's always a bit egg-on-face-esqe ;)
Language is a powerful thing. Ironically, I posted a note today in line with that. For people who aren't in the habit of spending time with certain manner of speaking, it's easier to be lulled into whatever influence the tone and verabage is meant to inspire. In other words, if people do not expect manipulation, they are more likely to be gotten by it. RFK is a long time member in the legal world, and as such, knows how to speak in a way that lends weight to his beliefs.
At first I was inclined to defend RFK in that he is not really someone who should be expected to know where or even how to get all of the relevent information about this, but then I checked myself with the realization that he has an advisor. Probably plenty of them, and as such, he should absolutely have as much data as is reasonably possible. Therefore, if he is stating something to the american people, we should be able to trust his word.
Unfortuantely, he does speak in a way I do not agree with. He tends towards the same sort of fearmongering every other politician seems to eventually get around to using. At least he does when it comes to the very topic he has found so long against. Frankly, he is bias in a big way, and that is also problematic.
As for his stance on better diagnosis and whatnot I suppose I do not hold it against him. Mostly because if he saw the same studies that I did ( which I searched after you mentioned the Scandinavian studies) it could simply be a matter of scale. For example, a Danish study of near 678,000 children found that the improved diagnostics and other things could account for 60 percent of the increase, which would still leave the 40 percent. That's still a rather large number of children. Scale matters. To play devils advocate for myself however, I must also point out that RFK is largely concerned with environmental issues and food issues in the US, so considering the Danish study may not be the most accurate course. This would also apply to the Scandinavian studies however.
It occurs to me then now that I haven't actually seen these studies done here in the US, and, that would likely be the determining factor for me as to the degree in which he is fearmongering. He isn't, or shouldn't be worried about the rest of the world in this regard so it makes sense the data should be relevent.
And finally, how to know what you do not know. That's a tough one. For me, I try to always remember there is someone that knows more than I do about any given topic, and that I am absolutely not the authority in knowledge gained. This translate to me being an absolute psycho and fact checking nearly everything new that I am told. For the things I feel I have knowledge in it's matter of staying humble. If I see something presented that doesn't align with my view on it well...we cant both be correct in the majority of instances. So, I find out because I do so love to be right. If it turns out I am wrong, well, I know what to do with that bit of data.
Great post. I would only add that it's never a bad thing to protective of the children, but it's a difficult line between protection and suffocating. As someone who thinks that empathy is a failing trait in society I find it difficult to belief anyone who seeks office is doing so for completely altrustic reasons. As such, it would then also follow that they likely do not care so much about anyone else children so much as they do about the overall image of the country in which they represent.
Edit: As an after-thought....it occurs to me that while it's exceedingly unlikely, and would be pretty embarrassing for RFK Jr and his staff but, surely he is aware that in the stats he quoted in that link you cited he is comparing literally JUST an autism diagnosis in 1970 with an ASD diagnosis in todays framework? It's not so much that diagnosis has gotten better, but rather more illnesses have become blanketed under a unified diagnosis in the form of ASD. That's not to say diagnosis hasn't gotten better, because surely it must have, but I think the disconnect is exactly this. If it's an honest slip up, fine, I can accept that, but if not, I will be rather displeased with RFK and his ilk for now doing exactly what the other side of the isle did while they were in office. I do not like that. Hypocrosy is not something that sits well. I'd hate to be full of impotent rage and start angrily at the tv as if I could actually do something about it.
I always appreciate how carefully you think through the points as you read. It’s nice to feel someone reads my writing with as much care as I write it :)
You raise an interesting observation about the Danish study and scale. It’s true that no single study can fully explain everything, and I agree that looking at local context matters in such cases. This is mostly to indicate, as I tried to show in the article, that the broader body of evidence consistently challenges the framing of autism as an “epidemic” caused by environmental toxins.
I also appreciated your personal reflections on humility, fact-checking & staying open to correction. None of us can hold all the answers alone. Being willing to check ourselves and remain curious is an important part of navigating these complex issues (such as public health!).
Thank you. I just wish that by reading carefully, that also translated into my typing carefully as well. At the time, I could swear it was all getting input as valid, coherent sentences. Then I hit the reply or post button without giving it another thought. Soon thereafter I will often re-read my post or comment and become rather annoyed that I find at some points I was 'pencil-whipped' by Substack's autocorrect, and cannot then be sure where that happened, and where I had stopped mid-thought and failed to pick it up again properly resulting in seeming like someone with a deficiency. Which is fine I suppose, we all have them, but for as much effort as I put into the response, it's disappointing to hear myself talking like someone new to the language.
The obvious answer would be to read my comment or post before making it official but, perhaps it's one of those habits we discussed in one of the first comments I left, but it always escapes me.
I love your take: “How do you know when you don’t know?” I never considered this and that makes a lot of sense of how someone can develop the same conclusions when they truly haven’t been exposed to the right info or know anything about peer-reviewed research studies.
Hey Dr Julie, thank you for stopping by. I only considered this angle because of the instance with my friend. She’s an educated personand willing to stay informed, but, as you say, just not well versed in the scientific literature. For me, the experience with her was truly eye-opening and very concerning, to say the least!
Dom, as a mother to an autistic child, I really appreciate the nuance and clarity in this piece. It’s refreshing and honestly, a bit of a relief to see someone take the time to gently dismantle the fear-based narrative that so often surrounds autism, especially from figures with large platforms.
The reminder that language builds realities really hit home. I’ve seen firsthand how framing autism as a tragedy can harm not just how others treat my child, but how my child sees himself. That matters more than people realise. I also really valued the breakdown of the historical and diagnostic shifts...something many people aren’t aware of, yet it’s essential to understanding the so-called "rise" in diagnoses.
Thank you for writing this with such care. It makes a difference.
Oh Salwa, as always, your words touch me so. This is such a rewarding comment to read and makes all the time spent writing a piece like this feel COMPLETELY WORTH IT (yes, with capital letters)! <3
Thank you!
This piece is excellently written and clearly presented. Others here have already expressed the multitude of ways this post is helpful. I merely say great work, thank you for writing this and you got a restack out of me for it as a result.
This means so much to me C. Jacobs. Thank you for the kind, motivating words and for the restack <3 It truly means more than I can say.
You're welcome. I also want to give credit and a properly due shout-out to Salwa for bringing this piece to my attention. I came here from her restack, and I'm glad for her pointing me to it.
She's a dear & has all my respect <3
I really appreciate what you wrote here. I appreciate your pointing out how to question people and things that seem authoritative. I also appreciate the reasons why people think the number of people on the spectrum has risen. Similar stats could support a rise in the number of people with trauma diagnoses, when it’s only an issue of recognition. Autism spectrum runs in my family and has been undiagnosed and misdiagnosed. I’m grateful for the time and effort you took here.
Hello Mary, thank you so much for taking the time to read this article and leave such a kind, motivating comment. It means a lot to me. I’m so glad you found the article useful in some way. And you’re righ, if we were to look at a number of psychological conditions through simplistic comparisons, we would indeed see a lot of “epidemics.”
Wishing you & your family all the best :)
Love, love, love!!! Great post!! Very well explained and great advice on how to separate propaganda telling from truth searching. A+++⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Hi Ann,
Thank you so much! Your words put such a big smile on my face :) I’m so glad you think so. I enjoyed writing this one.
Your constant support & encouragement mean a lot to me, Ann.
Lots of love,
Dom
You did a great job! Learning to read/listen with a critical mindset and asking questions are so important, not only in political contexts, but in research environments as well which unfortunately isn’t always as “clean” and unbiased as it claims to be! 😂
My daughter is a PhD student so we have a lot of these discussions. 😊
Wonderful! You guys have each other then :) <3
Thank you for your well-written piece on autism that refutes Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s misleading speech. Your piece is so necessary. In particular, it educates and informs about the progress that science and medicine have made over the past 50 years. But what’s scarier to me is the thought that there are parents out there who will listen to RFK Jr. and will not get their kids the care they need. I love the way you can describe RFK’s false claims as being “from another time, another place.” I remember when people claimed that ADHD was caused by red dye #2 about 50 years ago
Thanks Dom. I enjoy hearing and reading your articles.
Humbly, gently as possible while not being someone who is in any way shape, or form a medically relevent source of information, but from the humble lens of an everyday citizen, I was under the impression that ADHD isn't "caused" by anything, but rather a product of birth. Under that lens, red dye is in fact linked to changes in behavior in people with ADHD. Not red dye #2 specificially, but it's easy to see how as knowledge improved we transitioned from saying it's the cause of ADHD, to now thinking is effecting behaviorial changes in those who have it.
ADHD has a complex etiology. I think I wrote an article. I will send you a link. I don't think eliminating red dye #2 from your diet is a bad thing; however, in my opinion, it's best to eat less processed food with artificial colors in general. The problem is that when people are given the impression that the leading cause of ADHD is red dye number 2, and removing that from their child's diet will solve the problem, it becomes very misleading. The brains of people with ADHD are different than those who do not have the neurodivergency. The etiology is complex, and you are right, the birth process is one piece that has been identified. People with ADHD continuously need various services to learn to work around it and live with it to function. To me, after decades of research to reduce AdHd as caused by red dye #2 or the Autism Spectrum, etiology is simply that environmental toxins are naive. ASD is complex and is referred to as a spectrum because some people are quite impaired.. The concern is that money would be taken away from services that improve the quality of life for people on the spectrum. Also, there may be a lack of compassion for different types of neurobiology, and people on the spectrum might not be accepted for their talents. Still, they may be treated harshly when they don't behave like typical people..
Case and point to my "everyday citizen" would be that I have never before seen the word etiology. I had to look it up. Smart people have quite a few words for saying something else ;) I have a insatiable appitite for knowledge but realistically, I'll ever only be able to absorb a small fraction of the information my mind desires.
As such, I thank you for the more in depth response. I likely should have kept my comment to myself to begin with, as I knew there was a chance you didn't make your comment out of hand without already knowing what I had said. I also find the mistreatment of such individuals to be of the unmistakable sign of self esteem issues.
I worked at a facility called Hopewell Center in my home town for a few years where my job was to "supervise" a group of individuals with developmental issues running the gamut from mental illness to mental disorders and everything in between. Even now, after some twenty years gone from the job I feel a protectiveness for those less able to protect themselves.
That is not because i am smart it is because I want to do somewriting and I dont realize what is appropriate. i am learning.
It is always appropriate, to my way of thinking, to use whatever word comes to mind. It's a failing on my part for not knowing the meaning of the word, not yours for using it.
I dont ever think you should keep a comment to yourself. How will all of us learn from each other.You are right that there are certain foods that are not good for us. But the more I work as a therapist i learn most human situations are complecated.
What a beautfiful thing to say ! <3
Thank you so much.
I dont ever think you should keep a comment to yourself. How will all of us learn from each other.You are right that there are certain foods that are not good for us. But the more I work as a therapist i learn most human situations are complecated.
Hi Dr. Karen,
It’s always so nice hearing from you. Thank you for your thoughtful words. I’m grateful you found the piece meaningful, especially in highlighting the scientific progress we’ve made over the past decades. And yes, I share your concern: the idea that parents might be swayed by such misleading claims and hold back from seeking needed care is deeply worrying.
Thank you also for bringing in that historical perspective too. It tells us of how these kinds of narratives have echoed across time.
Wishing you all the good things in life,
Dom
“How do you know when you don’t know?” This is probably THE number one thing we have to focus on as a society. The world is full of RFKs with various platforms and it is so hard to know what’s true and what isn’t. Education is key here! How do we teach the masses what critical thinking looks and feels like in the age of misinformation?
Hi Dr. Brittany,
I’m so glad you raised this! I agree completely that this is one of the biggest questions we face today. Education is absolutely key, but I think it’s not just about formal education; it’s also about fostering a mindset of curiosity, humility, and a willingness to sit with uncertainty. Critical thinking isn’t just a skill, it’s also a habit, and it’s one we need to intentionally encourage, especially in this age of constant information flow.
You might have just given me the idea for my next post (yay!) and I’ll be sure to credit you for inspiring it! Thank you so much for adding such a thoughtful reflection to the conversation.
Best,
Dom
I love it! I’m certain I’ll be writing about this at some point as well. I teach a class about being a responsible scientific consumer. It’s a topic near and dear to my heart
RFK Jr. is dangerous in the way he manipulates facts to suit his narrative.
Hi Dr. Mike,
I’m so pleased to see you here in my comment feed :) thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. I completely agree: RFK Jr.’s manipulation of facts to suit his narrative is deeply concerning (and I've noticed it's on a broad range of topics!)
All the best,
Dom
As is my way, I tend to comment as I read with 2 tabs opened to facilitate this. Hopefully, I'll not get a surprise twist somewhere along the way, because that's always a bit egg-on-face-esqe ;)
Language is a powerful thing. Ironically, I posted a note today in line with that. For people who aren't in the habit of spending time with certain manner of speaking, it's easier to be lulled into whatever influence the tone and verabage is meant to inspire. In other words, if people do not expect manipulation, they are more likely to be gotten by it. RFK is a long time member in the legal world, and as such, knows how to speak in a way that lends weight to his beliefs.
At first I was inclined to defend RFK in that he is not really someone who should be expected to know where or even how to get all of the relevent information about this, but then I checked myself with the realization that he has an advisor. Probably plenty of them, and as such, he should absolutely have as much data as is reasonably possible. Therefore, if he is stating something to the american people, we should be able to trust his word.
Unfortuantely, he does speak in a way I do not agree with. He tends towards the same sort of fearmongering every other politician seems to eventually get around to using. At least he does when it comes to the very topic he has found so long against. Frankly, he is bias in a big way, and that is also problematic.
As for his stance on better diagnosis and whatnot I suppose I do not hold it against him. Mostly because if he saw the same studies that I did ( which I searched after you mentioned the Scandinavian studies) it could simply be a matter of scale. For example, a Danish study of near 678,000 children found that the improved diagnostics and other things could account for 60 percent of the increase, which would still leave the 40 percent. That's still a rather large number of children. Scale matters. To play devils advocate for myself however, I must also point out that RFK is largely concerned with environmental issues and food issues in the US, so considering the Danish study may not be the most accurate course. This would also apply to the Scandinavian studies however.
It occurs to me then now that I haven't actually seen these studies done here in the US, and, that would likely be the determining factor for me as to the degree in which he is fearmongering. He isn't, or shouldn't be worried about the rest of the world in this regard so it makes sense the data should be relevent.
And finally, how to know what you do not know. That's a tough one. For me, I try to always remember there is someone that knows more than I do about any given topic, and that I am absolutely not the authority in knowledge gained. This translate to me being an absolute psycho and fact checking nearly everything new that I am told. For the things I feel I have knowledge in it's matter of staying humble. If I see something presented that doesn't align with my view on it well...we cant both be correct in the majority of instances. So, I find out because I do so love to be right. If it turns out I am wrong, well, I know what to do with that bit of data.
Great post. I would only add that it's never a bad thing to protective of the children, but it's a difficult line between protection and suffocating. As someone who thinks that empathy is a failing trait in society I find it difficult to belief anyone who seeks office is doing so for completely altrustic reasons. As such, it would then also follow that they likely do not care so much about anyone else children so much as they do about the overall image of the country in which they represent.
Edit: As an after-thought....it occurs to me that while it's exceedingly unlikely, and would be pretty embarrassing for RFK Jr and his staff but, surely he is aware that in the stats he quoted in that link you cited he is comparing literally JUST an autism diagnosis in 1970 with an ASD diagnosis in todays framework? It's not so much that diagnosis has gotten better, but rather more illnesses have become blanketed under a unified diagnosis in the form of ASD. That's not to say diagnosis hasn't gotten better, because surely it must have, but I think the disconnect is exactly this. If it's an honest slip up, fine, I can accept that, but if not, I will be rather displeased with RFK and his ilk for now doing exactly what the other side of the isle did while they were in office. I do not like that. Hypocrosy is not something that sits well. I'd hate to be full of impotent rage and start angrily at the tv as if I could actually do something about it.
Be Well.
Hi Ryan,
I always appreciate how carefully you think through the points as you read. It’s nice to feel someone reads my writing with as much care as I write it :)
You raise an interesting observation about the Danish study and scale. It’s true that no single study can fully explain everything, and I agree that looking at local context matters in such cases. This is mostly to indicate, as I tried to show in the article, that the broader body of evidence consistently challenges the framing of autism as an “epidemic” caused by environmental toxins.
I also appreciated your personal reflections on humility, fact-checking & staying open to correction. None of us can hold all the answers alone. Being willing to check ourselves and remain curious is an important part of navigating these complex issues (such as public health!).
Thank you again for reading with such care.
Wishing you a great day ahead!
Dom
Thank you. I just wish that by reading carefully, that also translated into my typing carefully as well. At the time, I could swear it was all getting input as valid, coherent sentences. Then I hit the reply or post button without giving it another thought. Soon thereafter I will often re-read my post or comment and become rather annoyed that I find at some points I was 'pencil-whipped' by Substack's autocorrect, and cannot then be sure where that happened, and where I had stopped mid-thought and failed to pick it up again properly resulting in seeming like someone with a deficiency. Which is fine I suppose, we all have them, but for as much effort as I put into the response, it's disappointing to hear myself talking like someone new to the language.
The obvious answer would be to read my comment or post before making it official but, perhaps it's one of those habits we discussed in one of the first comments I left, but it always escapes me.
I love your take: “How do you know when you don’t know?” I never considered this and that makes a lot of sense of how someone can develop the same conclusions when they truly haven’t been exposed to the right info or know anything about peer-reviewed research studies.
Hey Dr Julie, thank you for stopping by. I only considered this angle because of the instance with my friend. She’s an educated personand willing to stay informed, but, as you say, just not well versed in the scientific literature. For me, the experience with her was truly eye-opening and very concerning, to say the least!