You’re right. We have no choice. But it is hard for me to be serious and objective. It is like having to disprove flat earthers.

> Most cases now are severe.

Wasn’t this always the case?

Thank you. Read the whole quote. He's just listing everyday things most people take for granted. Pointing out that these people won't be able to do them. Stupid to zero in on "write a poem". BTW, George Bernard Shaw did not have level 3 autism.

No.

We don't have a cure for autism.

We don't have a prevention for autism.

We don't have a clear cause for autism beyond recognizing that genetics play a role.

We don't even have a clear picture of the scope; one reason rates appear to be increasing is simply that we've gotten better at recognizing symptoms in previously ignored populations. But... We are probably still ignoring symptoms in some significant populations.

It is completely understandable that, as we learn more and the scope of the problem becomes more apparent, folks are alarmed and clamoring for politicians to Do Something.

...it is less apparent that there is anything productive to be done, beyond continued efforts to better understand the situation.

We (as a society) and Kennedy in particular (within his own family), have ample experience with the harms wrought by efforts to Do Something when no effective solution exists.

That doesn't make any sense. The percentage of people with severe autism barely grew, and is loosely correlated to the mother age.

The diagnosis of autism grow, but mostly because a lot more people are diagnosed with autism. I don't like that sentence, but modern autism is more of a social construct than what autism used to be.

'on the spectrum' is probably to me a big lie. I've worked (as a counsellor) with genuine autistic people, non-communicative or not, and frankly if you've learned to mask and to lie on your own, with intent (I did) or naturally (most people do), you shouldn't be considered autistic. Or at least you shouldn't hide behind your diagnostic.

In some circles, there is social capital to being part of some marginalized identity. The autism spectrum is so wide that it's pretty easy for many highly functional people to slot themselves onto it somehow. Then many of these people make this a core part of their identity and feel a need to "advocate" for other autistic people and autism in general. Once your identity is wrapped up in something, this isn't so different than advocating for gay rights or against racism or something. Of course advocating for what is a debilitating disease for many makes no sense and can actually be cruel.

Sure, you can edit or misquote many speeches to make them sound like Nazi propaganda, or simply assert they are similar to propaganda, but that itself is also propaganda.

An enormous amount, unfortunately for everyone? As it should, in a healthy society.

I think you misread my politics because I think attacking RFK over this point is stupid, counterproductive, and condescending. He is going to cause harm a million ways but this is not it. He is obviously not talking about the English professor who has had a very successful life. The author is trying to do a "well actually" here and missing the entire point, as well as being literally wrong when you read the words. So even a generous, pedantic angle is stupid.

For the record, I align completely with this liberal commentary in the NYT this week, that is 10x more eloquent than I am: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/25/opinion/autism-rfk-parent...