‘That rhetoric is deadly': Autistic individuals, family members express mixed feelings about RFK Jr.'s comments on autism
Some said his remarks were dangerous and offensive, while others
felt heard.
'It's wonderful that he's doing this, and [Kennedy] was right: the future is very bleak for people with autism,' said Hitsos, an alumna of Gordon College in Wenham who now attends graduate school in Texas.
Advertisement
But Trainor sees a future bright with promise despite his diagnosis. At 15, he works in the kitchen at his school, produces music on the side, and hopes to have a career working with animals.
'So many on the spectrum end up getting jobs,' said Trainor, who has a moderate form of autism that requires substantial support on communication issues. The condition has no cure and doesn't require one, he believes.
His 16-year-old brother, John, also has autism, but a milder form that requires less support. He said Kennedy
fails to acknowledge that many people with the syndrome are on the lower end of the spectrum and can have full lives.
'I have seen a lot of people treat ASD [Autism Spectrum Disorder] as some sort of disease that needs to be 'cured,' which is very offensive towards people like me,' John Trainor, a student at Bristol Plymouth Technical High School, said in a statement. 'We are normal people who have a much harder time socially.'
Advertisement
Autism is a developmental disorder that research has linked with genetics and certain conditions before and during birth, such as prenatal exposure to pollution or pesticides and
Kennedy has long promoted controversial theories that external factors, such as vaccines, are
to blame, and pledged his new research effort would determine the cause of the 'autism epidemic' by September.
'These are kids that, this is a preventable disease. We know it's an environmental exposure,' Kennedy
Those remarks came after a report from the US
Advocates and experts
say the higher prevalence is explained by
better detection methods and awareness of the disorder. Indeed, the CDC
Several of the nation's leading autism organizations condemned Kennedy's words and actions, describing them as hurtful and untrue.
Advertisement
'His comments were incorrect, but more to the point, they were eugenic,' said Colin Killick, executive director of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, which advocates for disability rights. 'Talking about autistic people as themselves being destroyed but also having destroyed their families is a horrific argument.'
While disagreeing with Kennedy, Killick said the autism community would welcome additional research, such as why people with autism have a higher incidence
He added that most new cases involve higher functioning people who need less support and
disputed the notion
they needed to be cured.
'Autism is a way of thinking, it is fundamentally ingrained into how a person interacts with the world,' Killick said. 'The idea that you would give someone a pill and magically make them non-autistic — you would essentially be making them an entirely different person.'
Julie DeFilippo, a social worker who works with autistic individuals and their families and has an autistic son, said some families were already wary of receiving an official diagnosis. She worries Kennedy's rhetoric will create additional stigma that will discourage some from seeking out support.
'I could say as a parent of an autistic kid, I get hundreds of moments of joy every day. That's the easy part — being at home and supporting him,' she said. 'The hard part is the world outside and putting him out there and the experiences of him being misunderstood.'
Hitsos, on the other hand, said that while she understands many people on the spectrum are 'happy' with being autistic, she is not.
Advertisement
'Every day is a struggle with the littlest of things,' she said. 'I don't want other people to go through it, especially those with profound autism.'
Now studying to become a music teacher, Hitsos said she has tried to get a job for years, but suspects her efforts failed because of her openness online about having the disorder.
She also expressed concern the autism community has given up on finding a cause and cure and settled for 'acceptance and inclusion.'
'Acceptance is good, I've been a self-advocate for years, but this is an epidemic, and until they find a cause for it, this is only gonna get worse,' she said.
But Killick wants Kennedy to be more aware of the effects of his words on the autism community. Every year, his organization participates in a
'That rhetoric is deadly,' he said, 'and hearing our nation's highest health official telling the world that autistic people destroy their families and implying that autistic people's lives aren't worth living is frightening, and it's going to have consequences.'
Emily Spatz can be reached at
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
3 hours ago
- Time Magazine
The Clashing Advice Over COVID-19 Shots for Kids
Should you give your baby a COVID-19 shot? The answer isn't as straightforward or as much of a consensus as it used to be: In an unusual move, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is recommending a different approach to childhood vaccination than the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Both groups agree that families should make individual decisions in consultation with their doctors about whether kids should be vaccinated. But the AAP has a stricter stance for the youngest eligible children in the U.S., recommending that all of them get COVID-19 shots. The CDC stopped recommending COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children older than six months following guidance from the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in May. The CDC does, however, recommend the shot for children who are moderately or severely immunocompromised. A day after the AAP released its recommendations, Kennedy fired back at the organization on social media, accusing them of allowing pharmaceutical-company donors to guide their recommendations. AAP maintains that its recommendations are based on science. Here's what to know about the clashing advice regarding COVID-19 vaccines for kids. What does the AAP recommend in terms of COVID-19 shots for children? Whether most children should get a COVID-19 vaccine should be based on their particular risk, the AAP says—taking into account their underlying conditions, such as asthma, obesity, or diabetes, as well as whether they live in a household with people at high risk for developing severe disease. That risk is higher for the youngest eligible age group—ages 6 months to 23 months—which is why the AAP recommends that all kids in this age group get vaccinated. 'For the youngest kids, the hospitalization rate is similar to that for adults 50 to 64 years old,' says Dr. Sean O'Leary, chair of the AAP Committee on Infectious Diseases. 'It's not nothing. And that's for something that can be prevented by a vaccine, which has been better studied than any medical product in our history. We have a very strong level of confidence in the safety of the vaccine.' HHS did not respond to TIME's request for comment. Why are the recommendations different? Generally, the CDC sets the schedule for which vaccines people should get and at which ages. The CDC makes its decision based on advice from its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). ACIP is made up of independent experts who volunteer to review data, discuss their findings, and make recommendations to help guide the CDC. But Kennedy—a longtime vaccine-skeptic who now oversees the CDC as head of HHS—fired all members of ACIP in June, accusing them of following industry interests. Kennedy replaced them days later with people he had selected, 'many of them with strong anti-vaccine views,' says O'Leary. Read More: How Having a Baby Is Changing Under Trump After ACIP was replaced, AAP—which typically works closely with the advisory committee and other liaison groups in setting vaccination schedules—decided not to attend ACIP's first meeting under the new administration in the spring. 'We saw from that meeting that ACIP has gone off the rails, essentially, in terms of the way they are operating and the messaging from the new members, which is very much around sowing distrust about vaccines and not making evidence-based vaccine recommendations,' says O'Leary. Weeks later, the AAP and other liaison groups were asked to discontinue their participation in ACIP work groups, O'Leary says. 'We received an email un-inviting us,' he says. The reason provided, he says, was that the organizations represented 'special interest groups,' which O'Leary says is a 'poor interpretation of the rules. All of the organizations at the table have expertise, and there are a lot of reasons to have representation from professional societies.' Which advice will doctors and pharmacists follow? O'Leary says pediatricians are anticipating having to have more conversations with families about the conflicting vaccine advice, and that the AAP is providing guidance to help inform those discussions on its website and via emails to its members. 'Politics has entered the exam room in a way that it never has before,' he says. 'These discussions will be contextual, depending on how well the pediatrician knows the family, what relationship they have, and how frank they can be with them in the discussion.' Ultimately, he says, the message from pediatricians should be this: 'We are committed to the health of children, and our recommendations are based on the best available science.' Read More: What the New COVID-19 Vaccine Guidance Means For You Pharmacists must take a slightly different approach, since they are only allowed to vaccinate according to the CDC's recommendations, while doctors can vaccinate outside of strictly approved conditions or populations in so-called 'off-label' use. Since current CDC recommendations say that families should make their own decisions about whether their children receive the shot, pharmacists will vaccinate kids if parents want them to have the shots, but won't specifically recommend that people get them. 'Our guidance is to always follow what the CDC or HHS recommends,' says Rick Gates, chief pharmacy officer at Walgreens. If families come in with questions about whether their child should get the COVID-19 shot, pharmacists will probably refer them back to their pediatrician or family physician. Will insurance cover COVID-19 vaccines for kids if the CDC doesn't recommend them? It's still not clear how insurers will respond to the differing recommendations. 'This is a real concern,' says Dr. David Higgins, an infectious-disease expert at AAP. Traditionally, a recommendation from ACIP means that a shot will be covered, since any vaccines recommended by the committee have to be reimbursed by insurers under the Affordable Care Act. It's not clear how insurers will interpret the individual choice of families when it comes to vaccinating children. The AAP is urging insurers to continue covering the COVID-19 vaccine for infants six to 23 months, despite the fact that ACIP does not recommend the vaccine for all kids in this age group. 'The AAP is already engaging with private insurers and policymakers to ensure our evidence-based recommendations are covered,' Higgins says, 'and we will continue to advocate to make vaccines accessible to every child in every community.'
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fox News Just Asked RFK Jr. Why He Works Out In Jeans, And His Answer Shockingly Makes Sense
Fox News' Jesse Watters hit Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. with what he described as 'the question that everybody is wondering about' on Tuesday. Namely, 'Why do you wear jeans when you work out?' Related: Kennedy, known for exercising in his literal (denim) sweatpants, answered: 'Well, I just started doing that a long time ago because I would go hiking in the morning and then I'd go straight to the gym and I found it was convenient and now I'm used to it so I just do it.' Related: 'OK,' the Fox News host replied to the vaccine skeptic that President Donald Trump has entrusted with his 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda. Related: 'There were a lot of theories, but that makes perfect sense,' Watters claimed, without offering to explain the sense he claimed there was. Watch here: Fox News/X / Via Related: The question came after Kennedy and Fox News personality-turned-Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth challenged Americans to do 50 pullups and 100 pushups in under five minutes. Watch that clip here: @FoxNews/X / Via This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Solve the daily Crossword
Chicago Tribune
8 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Doctors: 2025 will be the year of measles in North America. Why?
Looking back, 2025 may be characterized as 'the year of measles in North America.' The U.S. has recorded its highest number of measles cases in more than 30 years, although cases have tailed off significantly in the last eight weeks and are only slightly higher than they were in 2019. The current per capita incidence of measles in the U.S. is roughly 4 per 1 million people. While there is a cyclical component to measles every several years, declining vaccination rates are by far the largest factor in this increase. According to Johns Hopkins University, the average county-level vaccination rate in the U.S. for measles, mumps and rubella declined from 93.9% pre-pandemic to 91.3% post-pandemic, moving further away from the 95% herd immunity threshold necessary to limit the spread of measles. (There are actually far more people vaccinated in the U.S. than there were in 2000, when measles was 'eliminated' but the U.S. population has risen by 20% since then, and the number of unvaccinated has outpaced the population rise.) This is simply the latest illustration of the importance of vaccines. Even small decreases in vaccination rates can have big consequences. Which brings us to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his fraught relationship with the mRNA vaccine, the unique delivery system that carries genetic material into the body's cells to create an immune response against viral proteins. Under Kennedy's guidance, HHS will gradually wind down its mRNA vaccine development programs and cancel 22 vaccine projects that have funding totaling $500 million. Some mRNA contracts in their final stages will be allowed to conclude, but no new mRNA projects will be put in place. The government is essentially getting out of the mRNA business. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Operation Warp Speed, the federal initiative to rapidly develop an mRNA vaccine for the coronavirus, saved thousands of lives in the U.S. and millions of lives worldwide. The immune response created by the vaccine conferred relative protection for those infected and the severity of COVID-19 infections gradually declined. Besides this, those vaccinated with the mRNA vaccine were at less risk of developing post-COVID-19 persistent fatigue and other physical problems, known as long COVID. Recent data from a national study led by Rush University in Chicago found that those who did develop long COVID returned to full employment with fewer financial hardships if they had been vaccinated. Not that the mRNA-powered COVID-19 vaccine was perfect. It decreased disease severity but did not prevent infection or transmission. The immunity it confers is short-lived, so patients must be revaccinated at frequent intervals. Side effects are rare, but heart inflammation in young men is not uncommon. Kennedy's oft-intemperate and sometimes-unscientific remarks about vaccines have generated fierce criticism from the public health community and much of the mainstream press. His critics have made equally intemperate remarks, suggesting that Kennedy will have the blood of millions on his hands. Not yet anyway, but it makes it difficult to analyze in sober fashion what Kennedy is doing. What he is doing is rolling the dice. The strength of mRNA technology was that it could be developed and modified quickly in comparison to other non-mRNA vaccine technologies (almost nobody expected the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine to be ready as soon as it was). Scrapping mRNA research means the country might be unprepared upon the arrival of the next pandemic — whether it is a new COVID-19 strain, bird flu or some other agent that requires a rapid response. Kennedy and his HHS minions are redirecting efforts toward what they hope are improved technologies. He seeks vaccines developed with more transparency that are safer and more durable and can address the shortcomings of mRNA vaccines. Maybe that will happen. Currently, other platforms include inactivated vaccines that use the actual organism to stimulate the immune system (flu vaccine); attenuated vaccines that use a weakened form of the organism to cause a mild infection (measles vaccine); and conjugate vaccines that use parts of the organism that don't cause infection but train the immune system to respond (meningitis vaccine). But developing and testing new platforms takes time, and the vaccines created may still underperform in real-world usage. Is Kennedy's move to abandon mRNA research a calculated risk or a rash one? No one — not experts, the media nor the public — can say with confidence because the future and the science are uncertain. The next pandemic may occur in a year, a decade or a generation. Answering that question will require patience, intellectual honesty, humility and wisdom. The Kennedy family has always walked the fine line between fantastic luck and accomplishment on one side and tragic misfortune on the other. Let's hope the Kennedy luck is with the country here. Dr. Cory Franklin is a retired intensive care physician and the author of 'The COVID Diaries 2020-2024: Anatomy of a Contagion as it Happened.' Dr. Robert Weinstein is an infectious disease specialist at Rush University Medical Center.
