U.S. autism data project sparks uproar over ethics, privacy and intent

If they come out with a list of twenty adjustments they're going to make based on the study (things like but not necessary including: banning certain fire retardents, attempt to reduce break/tire pollution, adjusting the timing of (but not eliminating) the vaccine schedule, banning specific food additives, reducing/modifying specific pesticide use) I will believe this is a legitimate and well intentioned effort from someone who is orientationally correct but frequently epistemologically incorrect. If it's just "eliminate all vaccines" then I'll be very disappointed.

The third reich response a lot of other commenters are having is interesting. I'm no expert and have not investigated autism, but if the messaging in response to RFK JR is "yeah he says 1 in 36 kids have autism now but actually that's fine and how it always has been and actually autism is good and he's actually Eichmann" you're going to drive a lot of people right to every unsubstantiated thing he says.

I think 1 in 36 kids having autism is similar to how breast cancer diagnosis shot up when we had better imaging ability or when we figured out prostate cancer was actually fairly common in older men but not usually something worth doing anything about. When we merged in aspergers and autism together that obviously makes autism rates higher and as research continues on diagnosing autism it makes sense rates increase from there too? I mean in the past we thought autism was only common in boys!

I sincerely hope this is the explanation and I will be frustrated if this information is not presented as a percentage of the increase as part of the report. If it fully explains the increase, even better.