RFK's pledge to discover the "cause" of autism isn't just a ploy — it's a war on children's health
Robert Kennedy can't be bothered to hide his thorough contempt for science. "By September, we will know what has caused the autism epidemic," the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) declared on Thursday, when announcing a supposed "massive testing and research effort." Even a person with only a fifth-grade understanding of science can see the problem: no scientist can promise a definitive "answer" to a complex biological question at the beginning of a study. Nor can anyone confidently declare they'll have that inquiry wrapped up in a few short months, as if they're writing a summer book report instead of conducting a scientific investigation.
But it's easy enough to make these declarations when you've pre-determined your conclusion, and the only work left is to generate some fake statistics to back up that preordained "discovery." In the spirit of open-mindedness, I suppose I should pretend we must wait to see whatever nonsense is produced before judging it. In the spirit of common sense, however, there is no point in playing dumb. Kennedy has already indicated what he expects the "findings" to be: that vaccines did it, even though all legitimate science shows the opposite to be true. To make sure no real science accidentally happens, he has put a non-scientist/non-doctor in charge of this non-study: David Geier, a man who has been fined for practicing medicine without a license. Worse, his "treatments" of children are better described as pointless torture.
Kennedy's attack on science is despicable. But what may be even worse is his full-blown assault on the health and well-being of American children. His fixation on playing games with the bodies of vulnerable kids has a sadistic and eugenicist edge to it. Before confirming him, Senate Republicans should have listened to Caroline Kennedy, when she called her cousin "a predator" who enjoys "a perverse scene of despair and violence." She discussed how he would get a kick out of feeding baby chickens and mice into a blender to feed his hawks.
In 2011 and 2012, Geier and his father, Mark Geier, got in legal hot water with Maryland health authorities for running illegal experiments on children that are so weird that I hesitate to recount them here, for fear readers will believe I'm making it up. The two had concocted a nonsense theory, with absolutely no supporting evidence, that autism was caused by mercury in vaccines and precocious puberty. They were so set on this notion that, according to the Maryland State Board of Physicians, they would put young kids on puberty-blocking drugs, often without performing any physical examination at all on the patient. They would also put the children through chelation therapy to remove non-existent mercury from their systems. The children were subject to a battery of blood draws and other tests, but for no purpose. The board found these blood draws had no relationship to the "therapies" prescribed. The elder Geier had his medical license revoked. The younger, who has no medical education and just a bachelor of arts, was fined for practicing medicine without a license.The Geiers abused disabled kids, whom they gained access to by manipulating parental desperation. As Dr. David Gorski noted in a recent blog post about the Geiers, there are legitimate uses of puberty blockers in children, for precocious puberty or to reduce gender dysphoria in trans adolescents, but there was no reason whatsoever for these children to take these drugs. Delaying the onset of puberty in kids seems like it's punitive, as if they believe neurodivergent people don't deserve normal sexual development. Chelation therapy is no joke, either, and can cause serious side effects and kidney damage. The relentless blood draws, which don't seem to have any relationship to the "therapies" prescribed, feel like cruelty for its own sake.
Perhaps it's no surprise that Kennedy has a fondness for Geier. Kennedy has a sadistic streak towards children that is not hard to see, for those willing to look. In 2019, Kennedy played a major role in persuading large numbers of Samoan parents to avoid the measles vaccine in their kids, which he glowingly described as a "natural experiment." The result was predictable: measles spread rapidly and children started dying. Kennedy refused to blame the deaths on the measles — heaven forbid anyone decide it's good to prevent a deadly disease — and instead blamed vaccines for the deaths.
Kennedy and his anti-vaccine colleagues don't just minimize the dangers of the measles, but often slip into talking about this horrific disease as if it's a good thing to put children through. As I wrote about last week, he celebrated families in Texas who chose infection over vaccination, even though two of them lost daughters to measles. His anti-vaccine group had one set of parents explain why that's a good thing because "she's better off where she is now." He romanticized measles as a "great week" for kids, because they get to skip school and eat chicken soup. On Fox News on Thursday, he insisted about measles, "We need to do better at treating kids who have this disease, and not just saying the only answer is vaccination."
You don't need to "treat" a disease you don't get, but clearly, Kennedy prefers kids get measles. The "treatments" he recommends have echoes of the Geiers' ugly treatment of children. He's been telling parents to overdose kids with vitamin A, which can cause liver damage. He's been pushing the steroid budesonide and the antibiotic clarithromycin, both of which can have side effects. None of these treatments work, and they all risk making the situation worse.
Kennedy exploits the language of the "wellness" industry, with its misleading emphasis on "natural" health care and "letting" your body heal itself. What's ironic is that's what vaccines do. Vaccines work by stimulating the body's natural immune response, so that it prevents infection using the body's own resources. All these "treatments" Kennedy touts aren't just ineffective, they're not "natural." They're blitzing a child with often overwhelming amounts of medication, which won't work but could make the kid even sicker.
Kennedy's claim that his team of non-scientists and quacks will discover the "cause" of autism in a few short months is preposterous on its face. It's worse because scientists already know why autism rates have risen. As public health specialist Dr. Atul Gawande told Pod Save America last week, the main reason is "we have become much more liberal about diagnosing people on the spectrum." There is no concurrent rise, he noted, in the number of cases of severe autism.
This is a good thing. It means more kids have more health care access at younger ages, so they grow into happy, functioning adults. But Kennedy doesn't like that answer, so he ignores the facts. This history suggests one reason why. Despite all his protestations to the contrary, Kennedy does not want American kids to be healthier. He instead seems determined to bring back horrific diseases that do nothing but hurt or even kill children.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Bill to amend medically assisted suicide law draws emotional debate from Maine lawmakers
Jun. 9—AUGUSTA — A proposal to allow doctors to waive the waiting period for terminally ill patients who want to be given life-ending drugs drew an emotional debate from lawmakers in the Maine Senate Monday before it was rejected by one vote. The fate of the bill is unclear after the Senate voted the proposal down 18-17. It passed 74-64 in the House of Representatives last week and faces another round of votes in each chamber before it could be sent to Gov. Janet Mills for her signature. The bill would amend a 2019 law known as the Death with Dignity Act, which legalized physician-assisted suicide in Maine. It allows certain terminally ill patients to have the option to receive life-ending medication so they have control over their death. Maine's law currently requires a 17-day waiting period from when a person requests the medication to when they can receive the prescription. The change under consideration, LD 613, would allow a doctor to waive all or a portion of the waiting period if they determine it would be in the patient's best interest. Mills supported the original Death with Dignity Act, but it's unclear if she would support the change. Spokespeople for the governor did not respond Monday to questions about whether she has taken a position on the bill. The proposal allowing for the waiting period to be waived drew emotional debate from lawmakers who spoke about how they've personally been affected by illness and death. "This is not an abstract issue for me," said Rep. Kathy Javner, R-Chester, who has metastatic breast cancer, during last week's House debate. "I am living this reality and stand before you today, not in despair, but in hope that we can preserve the dignity and meaning of life, even in the shadow of death." Javner, who was against the change, said removing the waiting period would take away the time that families and physicians currently have to reflect and consider alternative options. "Let us not respond to suffering with surrender," Javner said. "Let us respond with compassion, with presence, with resources for pain management, with palliative care, with love." Senate Minority Leader Trey Stewart, R-Presque Isle, talked about his mother, who died at age 50 from colorectal cancer, during Monday's Senate debate. Stewart said his mother "broke out" of hospice care in order to be at home with her family at the end of her life. "I will always be grateful for that extra month we got," Stewart said. "I worry about the scenarios about what if they don't get it right and what opportunities are we forestalling through this," he added. "This was the promise that was made originally with this policy, that there wouldn't be that knee-jerk opportunity because of this protection." Maine is among 10 states and Washington, D.C., where physician-assisted suicide is legal for people with terminal illnesses, according to Death With Dignity, an organization in Portland, Oregon, that advocates for the laws as a means of improving how people with such diagnoses die. Waiting periods for medication vary state to state and can range from one day to more than two weeks, according to Death With Dignity. Some states do allow waiting periods to be waived if the patient is unlikely to survive. Maine's Death with Dignity Act has been used by 218 people since it was enacted, according to Michele Meyer, D-Eliot, the sponsor of LD 613. But another nine people have died during the waiting period because their illnesses progressed too rapidly, Meyer said last week. She said the bill does not change the law's criteria that the patient be terminally ill with a six-month prognosis confirmed by two doctors and that they have the capacity to make informed decisions. "This is simple and straight forward," Meyer said. "It corrects a rare situation that never should have existed in the first place. Some of us will not know the gift of a long, healthy life. ... Medical aid in dying offers decisionally capable adults an option to avoid prolonged suffering." In the Senate Monday, Sen. Tim Nangle, D-Windham, talked about his father's lung cancer and the pain he suffered. Nangle said he didn't know if his father, who lived in another state, would have used the Death with Dignity Act, but he said the option for the time waiver should be there. "This is about their choice," Nangle said. "What do they want to do?" Copy the Story Link
CNBC
23 minutes ago
- CNBC
'Collateral damage': Fund managers lobby Congress over Section 899 to avert foreign investors leaving the U.S.
American fund managers are lobbying Congress over a provision tucked inside President Donald Trump's tax bill that they say could lead to foreign investors "quickly" pulling investments out of the U.S. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which passed through the U.S. House of Representatives in May, aims to penalize foreign-owned firms operating in the U.S. and that are from countries with "unfair foreign taxes" under a provision known as Section 899. It is currently being considered by the Senate. The Investment Company Institute (ICI), which represents fund houses in the U.S., is lobbying Congress for an amendment as it warns the bill in its current form also impacts most foreign investments in U.S. stock markets, according to documents seen by CNBC. "In order to avoid the impact of section 899, portfolio investors are likely to retreat quickly from US equities, leading to capital outflows from the United States," the ICI said in a letter sent to Senator Mike Crapo, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, on June 5. "If sustained selling by foreign investors depresses US equity markets, this would harm both US companies and investors." Section 899 aims to introduce retaliatory tax measures against entities from countries that have levies such as the Digital Services Taxes and the OECD's global minimum tax rules. If signed into law, it could impact investors from the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Switzerland, among others. The tax would start at 5% and escalate by five percentage points annually to a maximum of 20%, on top of existing taxes, which vary by country and tax treaties. That could dent returns for foreign investors in U.S. equities. In the letter, the ICI also suggests that the U.S. fund management industry, which has collectively invested around $18 trillion in U.S. stock markets, would be "collateral damage" due to the impact of Section 899. "We do believe, however, that the current drafting of proposed section 899 should clarify its scope and avoid discouraging foreign investment in US equity markets through 'investment funds' such as US mutual funds and ETFs and their foreign counterparts (e.g., UCITS funds)," the ICI said. The letter to Senators goes on to say, "section 899 would penalize these funds and their shareholders by taxing passive income from US equity investments. To this end, investment funds would be collateral damage to the intended focus of section 899." Funds typically charge fees as a percentage of assets under management, and a withdrawal by foreign investors, over Section 899 concerns, could lead to lower earnings for the investment management firm. The Senate Finance Committee declined to comment, and Senator Mike Crapo's office did not respond to CNBC's request for comment. Foreign investors own $19 trillion in the U.S. stock markets, $7 trillion in U.S. government bonds, and $5 trillion in U.S. credit, according to data compiled by Apollo Global Management. The ICI said it's largely in support of the U.S. government's attempt to "protect US business interests overseas and to address discriminatory foreign taxes." However, it cautions that the current draft of the bill does the opposite. "Some foreign governments may actually cheer this capital flight from the United States because it benefits their local equity markets, which is not the behavioral incentive that Section 899 seeks to achieve," it said. Yuri Khodjamirian, chief investment officer for Tema ETFs, said investors in Europe who are focused on dividend-distributing U.S. companies would be "thinking quite carefully" about their holdings at this stage. "If suddenly you have to pay tax on that income, why would you hold that?" Khodjamirian questioned. Tema ETFs runs the American Reshoring ETF that is available to both U.S. and foreign investors. Tax experts suggest earnings paid out to foreign investors are more likely to be hit by Section 899 than capital gains and other methods of shareholder distributions. The Tema ETFs investment chief cautioned that the impact on the U.S. equities market would be relatively minimal as U.S. companies, say in the S&P 500, are typically not known for their dividends. "In the US, dividend yields are quite low. There's not a lot of companies paying. And most of the capital gets returned to share buybacks," Khodjamirian told CNBC. "Is that actually going to be that big of an issue then?"
Boston Globe
36 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's latest manufactured crisis has Los Angeles in its grip
Advertisement And it's hard to imagine them voting to trample local local enforcement. Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up But then this administration has been just spoiling for a confrontation — especially in Los Angeles, with presidential advisers like And the president threw gasoline on the fire. Even as more demonstrators took to the streets, Advertisement Now there is no excuse for violence on the streets of any American city — and burning Waymo robot-driven cabs is hardly a good image for those with legitimate concerns about tactics used by immigration forces. The initial demonstrations were touched off by immigration raids at a garment factory and But throughout the weekend there was also no evidence that state and local police were incapable of dealing with the situation without the unasked-for federal intervention. In fact, some These are not the LA riots of 1992 in the wake of the verdict acquitting police officers of beating a Black man, Rodney King. Some Trump has long been the master of the manufactured crisis — the kind he has repeatedly used to justify broad use of executive powers. The president had barely finished taking the oath of office, when he declared a crisis at the border, requiring an Then there was the declaration of an equally nonexistent In April, with the Advertisement But by calling out the National Guard in California, on his own initiative and under false pretenses, Trump has entered new and more dangerous territory. 'The people who are causing the problems are bad people, they are insurrectionists,' Trump The president has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act but instead is using a section of the US Code on Armed Services ( That certainly explains Trump's escalating rhetoric and that of his administration, but it is an allegation that at the end of the day would have to be proven in court. 'Federal law enforcement officers were attacked by violent radicals and illegal criminals waving foreign flags because Governor Newsom was too weak to protect the city,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt Those 'foreign flags' were evidence not of an 'invasion' but for many Mexican-Americans in LA, But for this administration there is no detail that can't be used to distort the truth. 'Let me be clear: There is no invasion. There is no rebellion,' Advertisement Sure, Trump has long had it in for California, threatening to But the truly horrifying thing about Trump's current move is that it could happen to each and every state in the nation — or, more likely, to each and every Democratic state, especially when truth is so irrelevant to the Trump administration and facts are so fungible. The other danger is that having normalized the deployment of troops during manufactured crises, Trump will feel empowered to use them in even more forceful or aggressive ways if and when the nation faces actual crises. California's political leaders will not be fighting this battle on behalf of the rule of law alone. It's our fight too, and it won't be the last. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
