logo
Kennedy's autism crusade ignores history, including his own family's

Kennedy's autism crusade ignores history, including his own family's

The Hill02-06-2025

In the telling of President Trump and his Health and Human Services secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., autism in the U.S. has exploded in the past decades with seemingly no explanation.
These claims skip over a mountain of data and touch on the country's dark history around treating people with neurological and developmental differences, including within Kennedy's own illustrious family.
'We are indeed diagnosing autism more than ever before in history. I mean, that's just a fact,' Andy Shih, chief science officer at the nonprofit Autism Speaks, told The Hill.
While Kennedy insists external factors like vaccines must be to blame, experts instead believe the trend is a reflection of an improved understanding of neurodivergence within the medical community.
'We think that the increases are due to the fact that there's greater awareness that there are tools now that allow us to screen systematically with children at certain ages, certain stages of development,' Shih said.
Autism, like many diagnoses, does not exist in a vacuum. Its perception and detection have changed drastically within the last century, with much of that change occurring throughout Kennedy's lifetime.
The exact cause of autism is unknown, but the current scientific consensus is that it's a complex amalgamation of genetic predispositions and environmental factors.
'We used to compare autism to what we call complex disorders or complex diseases like heart disease and lung disease, where there's certainly a genetic predisposition, but environment influences certainly affect outcome,' Shih said.
'Now we look at autism not as a medical condition, but part of the richness of human variation.'
Kennedy vowed to find the cause of autism by September of this year, suggesting that 'environmental toxins' in food and medicine are the likely culprits.
Since autism was first diagnosed, numerous causes have been suggested, several of which have been discredited.
In the mid-20th century, Austrian American psychologist Bruno Bettelheim proposed that emotionally distant parenting by so-called refrigerator mothers was the cause of autism, and he called for removing diagnosed children from their parents.
Kennedy has long put his support behind the theory that vaccines could cause autism, but analyses, including those conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), have found no link between immunizations and autism spectrum disorder.
Kennedy's stated goal for finding the cause of autism is to prevent it from occurring. During an April press conference, he said children with autism will go on to be burdens on their families and society.
'These are kids who will never pay taxes, they'll never hold a job, they'll never play baseball, they'll never write a poem, they'll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted,' Kennedy said.
'Autism destroys families,' he added.
As to whether autism can be prevented, it's unclear. And some experts question the necessity, and ethics, of such an endeavor.
'Is it environmental exposure? Is it maternal or paternal age? We don't know the answers to that,' said Nicole Clark, CEO and co-founder of the Adult and Pediatric Institute.
'We absolutely should be funding scientific research to try to get to the bottom of that. But the comments that he makes of 'we should prevent autism.' Those comments get very close to eugenics.'
Clark is also the mother of children with autism.
'Those comments start to weed into anyone that is different should be prevented,' she added.
According to the CDC, 1 in 31 children and 1 in 45 adults in the U.S. have autism. This is a stark difference from just a few decades ago, when roughly 1 in 150 children were diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder.
But autism as a diagnosis is a historically recent development. The first person considered to be diagnosed with autism, an American banker named Donald Triplett, died in 2023 at the age of 89. He was diagnosed in 1943, 11 years before Kennedy was born.
Autism was first added to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as a psychiatric disorder connected to schizophrenia in 1968. It wasn't until 1980 that the DSM was updated to reflect autism as a developmental diagnosis separate from schizophrenia.
The standards and criteria for diagnosing autism have also broadened over the years. But increased diagnoses don't necessarily mean increased occurrence.
'We can see a couple things that indicate that what's going on is that our ability to recognize and diagnose autism is improving, rather than that the actual rate of autism occurring in the population is going up,' said Zoe Gross, director of advocacy at Autistic Self Advocacy Network.
Diagnosis substitution is a phenomenon in which the labeling of one condition is replaced by another over time as knowledge and understanding change. Applying our current day understanding of autism spectrum disorder reveals broad areas for potential diagnosis substitution.
'We see that as we learn more about autism, people who clearly show the traits of autism but would in the past have been given just a diagnosis of intellectual disability, now have an autism diagnosis,' Gross explains.
Another factor contributing to increased diagnoses is that many people with autism spectrum disorder may appear to have no intellectual disability.
'Rates of autism without intellectual disability, that is increasing faster than diagnoses of autism with intellectual disability, which shows that if that group that would have been missed in the past that is making up the larger portion of the increase in diagnoses,' said Gross.
A report from 2023 that reviewed information from 2000 to 2016 found that 26.7 percent of children with autism spectrum disorder had profound autism. But there is nuance within that group, too.
'When they did that study, they defined profound autism as having a measured IQ below 50, or being nonspeaking, or being mostly nonspeaking. So, any of those three things, or any combination of those three things, you would get put in that category,' said Gross.
Despite being lumped together, many people with autism spectrum disorder who are nonverbal or mostly nonverbal are capable of productive activities, which Gross notes can include writing poetry.
Gross noted that when Kennedy was growing up, 'the diagnosis of autism wasn't even in the DSM.'
According to Gross, to be diagnosed with autism in the '40s and '50s, when Kennedy was growing up, was 'very rare,' as only a few clinicians would have been able to identify it.
Kennedy has claimed that he's never seen someone of his generation with 'full-blown autism,' which could be partly explained by how many of these individuals were hidden away from wider society.
Up until the mid-20th century, a large proportion of children perceived to be mentally or neurologically disabled were put in institutions where they were often subjected to extreme neglect. Institutionalization reached its peak in the '50s and '60s.
'If you look at statistics about the disabilities and needs of people who are in institutions around the time when they started to close in the '60s and '70s, you'll see that many of those people had exactly those kinds of disabilities and needs that Secretary Kennedy describes,' said Gross.
'Families would be told … 'You should forget all about them, try to have another child and move on with your life,'' Gross added. 'So, a very kind of coldhearted approach to society's responsibility to care for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.'
Beginning in the '60s, parents began moving away from institutionalization, choosing instead to keep their children at home. The Kennedys were early adopters of this choice, at least in the beginning.
Rosemary Kennedy, born in 1918, was the eldest daughter of Joseph and Rose Kennedy and aunt to the current Health secretary.
Developmental delays were observed early on in Rosemary's life; she was slower to walk and speak than her brothers and had difficulty concentrating. She is also remembered as having had a bright personality in her youth.
It's unclear if Rosemary had autism or another developmental disorder. But with these traits, the Kennedys would have been advised to institutionalize Rosemary.
'But Rose Kennedy, their mother and that would be Bobby Kennedy Jr.'s grandmother, didn't believe in that, and she thought the best place for Rosemary was at home,' historian Kate Clifford Larson, author of the book 'Rosemary: The Hidden Kennedy Daughter,' told The Hill.
'So, they diverged from what was going on in general in the public at the time.'
Joe Kennedy, who Larson describes as 'nervous and afraid,' consented to having Rosemary lobotomized in her early 20s, rendering her incapacitated and institutionalized for the rest of her life. She died in 2005.
According to Larson, this choice to raise Rosemary along with her other siblings, and her subsequent disappearance from their lives, had a profound impact on the entire family, including RFK Jr.'s father, the senior Robert F. Kennedy.
'He was 14, 13 when she was lobotomized, so he was cognizant, whereas Ted was a little bit younger. So, they were all affected, and they missed her, because it was a very, very tight family,' said Larson. 'Bobby missed her, too, and like his brother, Jack, once they got power in the government, they started making changes.'
Rosemary's sister Eunice Kennedy Shriver went on to found the Special Olympics, the largest sports organization for children and adults with intellectual disabilities. Eunice's son, Anthony Shriver, founded the group Best Buddies International, which connects people with intellectual and developmental disabilities with friends and mentors.
'Bobby Jr., he was part of that. He saw his family do all these things all those years,' said Larson. 'He visited those horrific institutions as a teenager and young man. He saw how horrible they were. And so, for him today to say that those things didn't exist, that autism and these other illnesses did not exist before vaccines, is crazy.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

There is no evidence vaccines cause autism. Study impact of plastics on health.
There is no evidence vaccines cause autism. Study impact of plastics on health.

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

There is no evidence vaccines cause autism. Study impact of plastics on health.

Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and others have tried to blame vaccines for the increases in autism in the United States and around the world. It has been documented that improvements in diagnosis have certainly increased the numbers. But there is no proof connecting vaccines to the problem. However, people who are struggling to understand why their family member has been diagnosed with the condition grasp at fallacies. Perhaps (it is worth studying) the abundance of plastics in our environment since World War II. Almost all the food we eat is contaminated by contact with some form of plastic. Not only food, but most medications, beauty products and household cleaners come in plastic containers. It is throughout our houses, furniture, electronics and vehicles. Water runs through plastic pipes. Babies drink milk out of plastic bottles and cups. Our clothes contain polyester. We breathe in fumes from plastics. Plastic is virtually impossible to avoid. Right now my fingers are typing this on a plastic keyboard. Where does plastic come from? Most of it is derived from petroleum and natural gas. Our current administration is shutting down research at universities and around the country. The petroleum industry lobbies very hard. Think about it, please. Roberta Mundschau, Waukesha Opinion: We know how to fix the biggest lie about Wisconsin's elections Letters: Ron Johnson has odd view on what saving the country means. He will cave to Trump. Opinion: Ernst said we're all going to die. Can we get decent health care in the meantime? Here are some tips to get your views shared with your friends, family, neighbors and across our state: Please include your name, street address and daytime phone. Generally, we limit letters to 200 words. Cite sources of where you found information or the article that prompted your letter. Be civil and constructive, especially when criticizing. Avoid ad hominem attacks, take issue with a position, not a person. We cannot acknowledge receipt of submissions. We don't publish poetry, anonymous or open letters. Each writer is limited to one published letter every two months. All letters are subject to editing. Write: Letters to the editor, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 330 E. Kilbourn Avenue, Suite 500, Milwaukee, WI, 53202. Fax: (414)-223-5444. E-mail: jsedit@ or submit using the form that can be found on the on the bottom of this page. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Kennedy should study impact of plastics on public health | Letters

Dr. Richard Goldberg: Preventive care and cancer screenings are critical to your health
Dr. Richard Goldberg: Preventive care and cancer screenings are critical to your health

Chicago Tribune

time5 hours ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Dr. Richard Goldberg: Preventive care and cancer screenings are critical to your health

The news of President Joe Biden's prostate cancer diagnosis came as a shock to the country. But preventive screening can protect you from having a similar shock of your own. While we don't know all the details about the former president's personal medical decisions, what we do know is this: Preventive care is absolutely critical to our health. Everyone should get the screenings appropriate to their age and individual health profiles. I have served as an oncologist for over four decades, helping thousands of cancer patients and their families navigate difficult diagnoses as well as helping thousands of other Americans catch a problem early when taking appropriate action can be curative. I have seen too many heartbreaking situations among my patients that could have led to better outcomes if a problem had been caught earlier. I have also seen firsthand the startling rise in the incidence, in particular, of colorectal cancer among younger adults at a time when incidence rates in older Americans are falling. Colorectal cancer is now the second-deadliest cancer for men and the third-deadliest cancer for women. The rise in early-onset colorectal cancer has been so dramatic that the recommended age for regular colonoscopy in people with no special risk factors was lowered in 2021 from age 50 to age 45. Some might think that moving up the screening age by five years is a small step, but it is not — certainly not in terms of outcomes. I have already witnessed examples where screening five years earlier has been consequential in identifying premalignant polyps and identifying early cancers before they metastasize when they are most likely to be cured. In many cases the polyps and even early cancers can simply be removed during a colonoscopy. I cannot urge this message strongly enough: All Americans of average risk that are over 45, and especially those exhibiting symptoms, need to get tested. One alternative is to have a colonoscopy at least every 10 years or more often if there are abnormal findings. Alternatives include stool-based studies such as Cologuard or Hemoccult testing, which need to be done more often to be most effective. New technologies are unlocking the potential for blood-based screening tests as well. The reason for this alarming increase in colorectal cancer incidence in younger adults is still being studied and the potential causes are debated in the scientific community. It is possible that there are several or even many different causes compounding the problem. As someone who practices risk-reducing dietary and activity strategies to protect my own health, I commend President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr. for their emphasis on disease prevention and identifying the causes of America's chronic illness epidemic and finding measures to prevent disease like colorectal cancer. It is critical for all Americans to know what screenings are recommended at each stage in life. In general, everyone should get an annual physical, and see a dentist regularly — and everyone should receive the standard childhood vaccines. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends women over 21 should get screened for cervical cancer and women over 40 to be screened for breast cancer. The task force recommends that smokers over 50 get checked for lung cancer. And men aged 55 to 69 are recommended to be screened for prostate cancer with a prostate specific antigen test. These and other screenings can help catch cancer or even precancerous growths as early as possible. Unfortunately, surveys show that a large number of Americans don't get these tests done, including for reasons of cost. I understand why people might do this, but getting a checkup and talking to your health care provider about what screening tests are appropriate for you is the first step to taking action to improve our health and our lives. Fortunately, there are also some positive trends in oncology to celebrate. Science continues to deliver great promise for the most vulnerable among us: the sick. In spite of some concerning short-term trends, cancer mortality has dropped by one-third since 1991, mainly because of a dramatic decrease in smoking. Life expectancy rose by almost a full year from 2022 to 2023. In my field, recent studies have shown exciting potential for people with confirmed cancers that are called immuno-oncology approaches. These are cancer treatments that enable the immune system to kill cancer cells, rather than using the more traditional treatment methods including chemotherapy, radiation and radical surgery, which often have harrowing and sometimes lifelong side effects. These approaches are changing the model in cancer care and particularly in my area of clinical practice and research, colorectal cancer. The benefits of these immune targeted therapies are changing treatments in many types of cancer. However, only a small subset, about 5%, of colorectal cancers respond to this approach using currently approved therapeutic regimens. More research is needed on this treatment approach to determine how to best harness this powerful tool and get new drugs approved by the FDA to help the large majority of colorectal cancer patients. But doctors, patients, and their loved ones can reasonably hope that the thousands of scientists around the world who are working to find better treatments and cures will change our current standards of care. All of us should ensure that we receive the screenings and vaccines appropriate to our age — and that our kids do the same. An ounce of prevention is still worth at least a pound of cure.

How animal welfare became a GOP issue
How animal welfare became a GOP issue

Axios

time5 hours ago

  • Axios

How animal welfare became a GOP issue

Animal welfare is becoming part of the Trump health team's agenda, as officials press for changes to drug approvals and product evaluations and portray lab animal testing as a symptom of big-government bloat. Why it matters: The effort is the product of a more than decade-long push to elevate animal welfare issues with the political right that now features congressional oversight hearings and threats to cut off taxpayer funding. Case in point: The Food and Drug Administration is phasing out animal testing requirements for antibody therapies and other drugs and telling companies that use other methods that they may receive streamlined product reviews. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the leaders of the FDA and National Institutes of Health urged Canadian food inspection officials last month to spare hundreds of ostriches infected with bird flu from a planned cull, saying there would be benefit in studying the birds' immune response. Congressional Republicans like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) have also held hearings on " taxpayer funded animal abuse" and proposed measures that would close down federally funded labs that use animals. Trump had a mixed record on animal welfare issues in his first term. While he signed a federal law outlawing animal cruelty as well as animal fighting, his administration rolled back protections for certain at-risk animals, reversed rules restricting hunting on public lands and even deleted records of animal welfare violations. The FDA's new non-animal testing strategy could accelerate the process for bringing cures to market and give drug and biotech companies more flexibility — though it relies on some still-unproven alternatives like certain AI models. Between the lines: Among those driving the shift is the White Coat Waste Project, a libertarian-leaning group that is targeting what it calls "wasteful and secretive" taxpayer-funded experiments over its ethical concerns around animal testing. Founder Anthony Bellotti, a former Republican congressional staffer, told Axios the group adapted the playbook for cutting off federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Activists "went after the money source, because if you can fund a problem, you can defund it," Bellotti said. "And I said, 'Holy crap, animal testing is virtually all taxpayer-funded.'" The group has portrayed animal experiments as government waste, pointing to studies that show an 85% failure rate in studies that rely on animal models. The group has published controversial investigations of NIH-funded research, claiming taxpayers funded experiments where beagles were "bitten to death by flies" and that former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci wasted $1 million on painful experiments on the dogs. NIAID has disputed the findings. Zoom in: The shift in framing animal welfare so it appeals to conservatives, including linking it to causes like states' rights, has taken place over many years, said Republican lobbyist Marty Irby. "I use the term creation care a lot ... we have all these things that we talk about: taking care of people, health care, whatever the case may be. But you know, you can't just push animals to the side." Efforts to address factory farming not only overlap with the Make America Healthy Again movement's interest in food quality but with national security concerns, since one of the biggest pork producers, Smithfield Foods, is owned by a Chinese company, Irby pointed out. There also are attempts to tie animal testing back to conservative suspicion over the pandemic response, including subjecting hamsters, rabbits, monkeys and many other animals to infectious disease experiments without pain management. The issue polls highly among voters on both sides of the aisle, Irby said. The other side: Animal testing remains critical to understanding disease progression and evaluating the safety of drugs, vaccines, food additives and household products. Because they're susceptible to many of the same diseases and have shorter life spans, lab animals provide a window into disease processes across several generations. Experts say the solution in the near time likely will involve a combination of animal and non-animal testing. What's next: Bellotti said plans to phase out animal testing don't go far enough, and he's continuing to push for more lab closures. "There's a lot of rhetoric coming out of the NIH that doesn't match reality," he said. "Without a funding cut for animals and labs, without a timetable and a deadline and a commitment to phasing it out ... it's status quo."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store