David Geier is not a dr. He has never been a dr. He has never studied medicine scholastically. He is the son of Mark Robin Geier, a de-licensed physician who lied in testimony in over 90 cases, to the point he lost his license in every single state in which he was licensed. He misrepresented his credentials continuously, testifying as an expert in fields he has no history or study. He claimed he was a geneticist and epidemiologist.
Worse, he brought his son into the practice and they literally castrated autistic children
I know nothing about the Greiers…. First time I’ve ever heard of them so can’t really comment on this directly…. But sincerely I ask…. Does anyone doubt there is an autism problem in America?
The incidence of autism now vs when I was a kid is ridiculous
So putting aside the selection for a moment- which I don’t disagree may be a stupid pick…. Just don’t know anything about these guys…
Isn’t the real story here that- at least RFK has this on his radar?
And isn’t it logical that he would avoid mainstream doctors or researchers? I mean- they haven’t seemed to be able to reduce or fix the problem right? The rate of autism just grows and grows each year.
So I’ll choose to remain agnostic on this and hope that he gets some good research and or results…
From someone that has autism in the family, it can be debilitating for families. I’m glad it’s being looked at.
No, that’s not the real story at all. We’ve been working to study autism long before RFK Jr and his brain worm were ever on anyone’s radar. RFK appointed a guy who castrated autistic kids like the Nazis did with the mentally disabled.
This is the most asinine statement. The increase in autism doesn’t mean more kids are developing it, but that our diagnosis are better and have changed. For example, DSM-IV and DSM-5 significantly changed how autism is diagnosed. These updates brought more children under the autism umbrella, particularly those who are high-functioning with ASD or Asperger’s.
Also, it’s not a problem to be fixed. It’s not a single disease with a cure; it’s a neurodevelopmental condition. The goal of researchers is to better understand it, provide early intervention, improve the quality of life and address co-occuring challenges.
Choosing to avoid evidence-based medicine because of dissatisfaction with a trend is not logical; it’s emotional reasoning. Mainstream doctors are the ones conducting large-scale genetic and neurological studies, identifying early indicators and advocating for early therapy. Your alternative medicine approaches literally castrated them, used bleach therapy, etc.
By your standard, should we also reject cardiologists because heart disease still exists? Do you want your heart surgery performed by the homeless guy at 7/11 who thinks it’s caused by a worm in your brain?
It’s been looked at. Now, your fella wants a national registry, to move your autistic kid to a work camp in Missouri, and let Mr. Geier castrate them. You applaud that, of course.
I was going to say no one doubts that but, after reading Warden’s reply, maybe he does?
Either way, studying autism, identifying causes and risk factors, etc. I’m all for continuing that. The main criticism here is who he’s tasking for the job, which you’re choosing not to comment on.
Only if you don’t believe in “mainstream medicine.”
For what it’s worth, the experts deny this, and in fact assert that in 2013 the standards for autism got more restrictive.
While this is true, I’m pretty sure that chart is backfilling previous Aspergers diagnoses into those old numbers, comparing like with like.
I disagree completely. This might be similar to how deaf people say there’s nothing wrong with them and they don’t need to “be cured.” And that’s a fine positive mentality to have, but as a society we should always be focused on reducing disabilities and impairments.
Broader criteria before DSM-5 (used from 1994-2013) allowed for diagnosis like Asperger’s and PDD-NOS. These expanded the spectrum and included people with milder or atypical traits. The increased awareness allowed for teachers, pediatricians and parents to become more educated about autism symptoms and many more children evaluated. Also, the broadening of diagnosis led to a gateway for more school support and therapy. Less stigma, more awareness, etc. led to larger pools
The bar went up dramatically with DSM-5, but awareness and evaluations increased.
Don’t be so sure. It’s presented by TACA, known for pseudoscience and conspiracy theories and the chart itself is presented in a way to skew the perception: the y axis is inverted. 1 in X gets visually smaller as X gets smaller, which can be misleading if misunderstood.
Reducing suffering and improving function is a noble, but this does not mean eradicating the person’s identity or neurotype. Like deafness, it is not just an impairment, but a way of experiencing and processing the world. While autism can involve challenges like sensory issues and communication difficulties, it also presents strengths like pattern recognition and deep focus, honesty. Trying to “reduce autism” often implies reducing the person. Would you support “fixing” anybody you consider deviating the from the standard? Would you want to fix introversion or giftedness? Fixing autism implies there is a normal brain. There isn’t.
Anyway, that’s my attempt at an objective, 30,000 ft view. I don’t have a ton of experience with it. My nephew is autistic, or definitely has Asperger’s. He’s fine. He’s doing well in life. You can tell he could go either way, depending on how his parents handle things and raise him. He could end up a sociopath and take over the world. He was studying military strategy at a high level at maybe 7 yrs old. I often worry he has no empathy or even understands what it is, but then he saves a cricket or something. Back when I was a kid, they’d call him weird, but not a tard. Elon Musk has Aspergers. Do we want to “fix” him? Many of you defend his accomplishments. Would those have happened without his autism? I’d venture to say he’d definitely be called retarded in the area I grew up at that time. They’d have put him on a short bus, and he’d be told he’s broken, needs to be fixed, and kept away from other kids, given some crayons to chew on. Do you think we’d have SpaceX if that was the case, if the world thought he needed to be fixed? Flat out, he’s fucking retarded by the standards used when I was a kid. Einstein was autistic. Newton was autistic. Cavendish was autistic. Telsa was autistic. Darwin was autistic. Do we want to “fix” them? Bottom line…with the little experience I have with it, my nephew isn’t retarded. He has Asperger’s. He’s popular, good at the weird little sport he does, and I think he’ll do well in life. Also, he might kill us all and never blink twice about it. We’ll see.
Does the same argument apply to mental retardation and down syndrome?
“Curing” autism is less about changing any actual person and more about adjusting risk factors to prevent future disabilities in people who don’t exist yet.
I take your point, but we’re talking about fixing disabilities. If something is defined as and labeled a disability, well then we’ve already decided it is a detriment, haven’t we?
Again, I take your point, but autism is by definition neurodivergent. Neuro divergent means different than normal. It’s already been defined as outside the broad range of “normal.”
These are great made-up examples. But either way you choose to run with this speculation, this “mystique” of autism and individuality almost always ignores the 1/3rd of autistic kids who are nonverbal. It ignores the kids who will never be able to live on their own, take care of themselves, or have anything resembling a normal life.
But hey there’s this cool chick on Tik Tok who’s like half a percent on the spectrum and thinks it’s offensive to try to find a cure, so we should definitely listen to her…
No. Downs Syndrome is caused by a duplicate chromosome. Mental Retardation is an outdated term for intellectual disabilities which include a myriad of diagnosis like Downs Syndrome, Fragile X Syndrome, FASD, Williams Syndrome, Rett Syndrome, Cerebral Palsey, etc. Each has its own affects, diagnosis, and treatment plans. In these cases, it has to do with how the condition interacts with identity and autonomy. The broader issue is are we trying to reduce suffering and support for individuals in living fuller live on their terms, or are we trying to erase differences because it makes us feel uncomfortable.
Okay. But, we don’t know what causes it, and “it” means quite a few different things.
I get your point as well. It seems intuitive to assume “disability” means there is something inherently negative that needs to be fixed. But, that assumption depends heavily on how we define disability and who is doing the defining. At times in our history, independence of any kind in the female gender would label someone hysterical and lend to them being committed and tortured. Our very own RFK Jr hired people who castrated autistic children in the mold of Nazis.
It’s important to understand there are different ways of understanding “disability.” There is a medical model and a social model. It’s important to recognize that disability is not solely a medical condition, but also a social construct. What is considered a disability can vary across cultures and time periods, often reflecting societal attitudes and biases.
Autism is unique in that it is not just about limitations, but also about a different way of experiencing the world. Yes, they can face challenges just like people who lack empathy, are scared of social situations, and a myriad of other personality traits we let pass by on a daily basis. They also have strengths.
You’re right, but what’s the important question to ask is: who defines what’s normal and why does being outside of that range automatically imply something bad, something to be corrected or eliminated? Societies, historically, that have considered deviations as “threats” opens the door for dehumanization, leading to things like sterilization, institutionalization, and mass murder of disabled and neurodivergent people under the guise of “cleansing” or “fixing” society.
Obviously, not everyone today who talks about “fixing” autism or disabilities is coming from that kind of intent. But the thought process that views human variation as a flaw needing correction, rather than as diversity, is on that same spectrum of logic, even if it’s many steps removed.
None of these individuals were formally diagnosed as autism as a medical diagnosis didn’t exist in their lifetimes. However, psychologists and biographers have strongly hypothesized that many important historical figures exhibited consistent traits we attribute to autism today, some of which I listed above.
While I don’t disagree about the 1/3 of autistic kids who are nonverbal and can’t take care of themselves, we’ve had this issue throughout the entirety of human history. They might not have been labeled autistic, but they were the same people with the same problems. Pretending it just started is disingenuous.
While I find it entertaining that you’re recently doing your best impression of JD Vance and Ana Kasparian, it doesn’t change the fact that RFK Jr. hired a non-physician with no medical training and a history of castrating autistic children—a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, a violation of criminal law in most countries considered aggravated assault, child abuse, or grievous bodily harm, historically used in eugenics programs including Nazi Germany.
But by all means, let’s roll our eyes at a neurodivergent woman on TikTok for having the audacity to suggest maybe disabled people shouldn’t be ‘fixed’ with a scalpel. Tell me again who’s the danger to society?
I don’t know when autism started, and I don’t know whether some of those famous examples were on the spectrum or not, and I DEFINITELY don’t know what causes it.
What I do know is that it debilitates LOTS of people, and a lot of smart scientists are asserting that the condition is increasing in frequency not just diagnosis, and that it shouldn’t be taboo to do research into what causes it and attempt to cure it. Just like we would prefer babies not to be born deaf, even though once they are we should give them all the love and support and respect and understanding they need.
Maybe it wasn’t clear from my first comment calling this move a dumpster fire, but RFK and his people are all idiots and menaces to society. I am 100% with you that this appointee should be kept 1000 miles away from autistic children.
The only deep discussion in this thread I found it worthwhile to spend time on was when GSC said, “Hey can we at least agree that we should research autism?” which I agreed with. Sure, that’s just a deflection by GSC because the actual issue is the idiots put in charge of doing it, but it’s worth agreeing with the broader point in this age of hurt feelings.
I will put it very simply: It comes from a very privileged position for a highly functioning autistic person to believe that autism should not be cured. They’re the luckier ones who can manage themselves. Not everyone is so fortunate.
