Autism Explosion: Is it a vaccine, fluoride, or modern society?

Common sense is the “forgotten branch of psychology,” which was observed by philosopher Goalkeeper Chesterton in the early 1900s. The soulless and ubiquitous nature of “psychology,” meaning “psychology,” meaning “study of the soul,” may make you wonder what he says today.

And it is because it is so widespread that it is said that autism diagnosis is very common today. We are more “aware” this issue, and the idea is that “better screening is better.” But there are other theories. Some people have vaccines involved in autism symptoms, while others have cited fluoride as a possible cause. HHS Director Robert F. Kennedy Jr. vows to investigate the issue, saying “by September, we know what caused the autism outbreak.”

But what about us? What if the cause is as cultural as it is, or even more so than the environment? What if, as one author said on Sunday, “Society is a problem”?

The harsh truth about soft science

No wonder this is a major topic. The rate of autism diagnosis has increased by 6,800% over the past 30 years. The rise over the past 60 years has been a whopping 69,000%. Of course, the majority of this is that autism today is not your grandfather's autism. More in that moment. But first, some perspectives and history are appropriate.

The late “Helter Skelter” mass murderer Charles Manson reportedly said in a prison interview. (No, I don't imply that people with “autism” and all other “disabilities” are “crazy.”) Broadly taking his statement, he had a point. As psychiatrist Dr. Ralph Lewis said in 2022, “It seems like everyone has ADHD these days.” Doctors Health Press went further in 2013.

If the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) had that method, we would all be suffering from some form of mental illness.

Certainly, when all you have is a psychological hammer, everything looks like a psychotic nail. Evidence is also found in the pudding as people with certain “disabilities” have grown rapidly like national debt. Over the past 60 years, psychological diagnosis has increased by perhaps 150%. (All numbers follow the Grok-AI Internet search unless otherwise stated.) Perhaps that doesn't sound too bad, but I think the actual numbers are high. But consider the US increase in some specific “disability/state” over the past 30 years.

Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder – 500-800%. “Gender” discomfort (GD) – Approximately 14,900%. Autism Spectrum Disorder – 6,800%, from about 1 in 1,500 in the early 1990s to 1 in 36 by 2020.

Disability creation disorder?

GD should in fact be called a sexual identity disorder (SID – I believe you are in the “wrong” sex body) specifically speaks. It is now established that most children and adults diagnosed in this way do not actually have SIDs. Much of this phenomenon is explained by “social contagion.” And many men “identify” women (Autoguinephilia) (when men derive sexual arousal after being spoofed as women). Additionally, whistleblowers revealed in 2023 that a high percentage of young people diagnosed with SID in “gender” clinics actually suffer from other issues, such as “autism.”

This would not be surprising to Sid's patient Alan Finch (who even underwent amputation surgery). After all, he recognised his mistake and said, “Sexual personality traitorism was invented by a psychiatrist.”

It's also the most original. Consider that the following “failure” is in or contained in the DSM:

Opposite-directional disorder Internet game disorder Caffeine withdrawal Destructive mood dysregulation disorder (bad behavior in children) Mathematical disorder disorder

Is this surprising? Cookie Maker wants everyone to eat cookies. Tennis racket makers want as many people as possible to play tennis. Similarly, mental health facilities are instinctively trying to expand their markets, and therefore seeking to expand their revenue potential. And this happens every time something once called sin or eccentricity is labeled as a “disability.”

So, going back to the autism diagnosis, we have to ask: is this market influential? And shouldn't we question psychiatric facilities that have disability creation disorders in themselves? Keep something in mind when assessing reliability. This was an institution that claimed that a boy could transform into a girl, and based on this, the child was amputated.

Is it all really “autism”?

One person who questioned the story of autism is the aforementioned author and commentator Andrea Widburg. Adding perspective, she points out that over the past decade, the rate of autism diagnosis in adults (ages 26-34) has increased by 450%. She also states that she knew and edited the book for those who were always understood by autism.

Widburg author Ido Kedar said, “Nonverbal, limited impulse control and he's fighting terrible against the various stimuli around him… People like IDO are extremely rare. For my years, I only know others with true nonverbal autism.”

I can make this second. As a child in the 1970s, I saw someone with autism once or twice, and I couldn't miss it. Oh, we didn't understand the inner world of these individuals in the way we are today (Kedar's book offers such insights). But they obviously had very serious problems.

That was the case. Today there is a “spectrum” of autism, including children who are not even remote like Kedar. As Widburg writes about the diagnosis:

Symptoms no longer require a complete disconnection from the world that IDO and a few other people like him see. Instead, autism can now be diagnosed based on avoidance of eye contact, being antisocial or not responding to social cues, OCD with toys and objects, obsessive interest, overactivity, constipation, very anxiety, and more.

(Depending on the case, there may be more serious indications.)

Widburg says she knows many children who exhibit the specificity above. “We called out those kids, nerds, and ultimately nerd and nerd billionaires,” he wrote. They had no “disability,” but “were just part of the vast bell curve of humanity.”

And do they really have a natural “disability” today? Or is it some other job?

Cultural cause?

Widburg theorizes the causes of socialization-oriented nature of the “autism” phenomenon. First, she writes about the effects of Screen Time:

Your social life is texting (as is true for so many people), and if your activity is a computer game (this is especially true for young men who spent hours flicking their thumbs in a dark room, flicking their thumbs. This can explain many people in a cohort of 24-36 years old who have been diagnosed with issues with autism spectrum.

In other words, our youth are socialized.

Frankly, I had the same insight. For example, what kind of body language do you have and should you display when communicating via screen? (Emojis.)

When assessing this, consider that a child's brain has a large neuroplasticity and can actually change based on environmental stimuli. This is no surprise. Science has learned that, after all, the environment can even affect gene expression.

Extreme examples of environmental impacts are seen in rare cases of wild/severe neglected children. For example, children who do not learn language during critical development may not be able to function fully within it. When they deny human contact, they will develop forever. This also raises questions.

Isn't it logical that reduction in human contact can have similar effects as a reduction in degree?

Certainly, it is not normal for a child to be raised on screen. Historically, children spent time interacting with other people rather than devices.

The Tragedy of Covid

Widburg also mentions the aggravation factor: isolating, masking and restraining children from being unsociable. Again, relevant is the story of Dr. Leana Wen, a medical analyst at CNN. Wen was a strong advocate for hiding children to protect them from the coronavirus.

That is, until practice harms your young son's “language development.” Then she changed her songs.

(Note: If Wen had read the new American and cared, she wouldn't have hurt her boy.

So, what can we say about the phenomenon of autism? Well, we know that young people with different problems (e.g. autogynephilia) are grouped together with rare sexual identity disorder patients with rare sexual identity disorders. Similarly, probability determines that the “autism” category also includes people with different problems. A small percentage certainly has biologically determined problems, and perhaps there may be environmentally induced problems. But what is the possibility that you are not plagued by a socially created cross?

Betting on that means not only saying your anti-social son is autistic, but also hearing that he can become a girl if he feels that way.

And the good news for the mental health profession is that either way or both, it makes money.