Genetics clearly influence vulnerability. But the severity cannot be explained by genetics. If severe autism was primarily caused by inherited genes, we would see it die out over time because people with the most severe forms have extremly low reproductive rates.
True, however there are so many potential environmental factors which could well be as key as anything. BTW, I am not sure the severity is any greater than it has been versus the recognition/diagnosis of it. I'd love to see data from the pre-40s, when autism was not a recognised ailment/condition. It's not dissimilar IMO to depression, ADHD and BPD, all conditions which were largely given short-thrift or none at all before the 1900s. Of them all depression probably got the most play, and a bit laudenum or some such drug would do the trick (I am being glib of course).
Of all of them, ADHD for me is perhaps the saddest (along with the autistic spectrum) because I am utterly convinced that right up until there was some final declaration of ADHD in the '80s, generation upon generation of kids suffering from it were likely given a whack and punted outside rather than treated. So I do wonder if the fact we are now more alive and aware to conditions and diagnosis than ever before (which has resulted in far greater numbers) is worth paying attention to?
A side story. My daughter was recently diagnosed as having high-function autism. She has also in the past been diagnosed with both ADHD and BPD (anxiety and depression are in there too). She's doing fine all told, however in order to function in society there are certain things and protocols she has to execute. As a consequence of her diagnosis, her doctor suggested that I could also have a few traits myself. What he said made sense. Yet there is no way in the world I would ever have been diagnosed as a kid, quite simply because I was not on any obvious spectrum (when you look into it then you see how my traits could well be HF autistic). If you met me, you'd never see it. An interesting footnote here is my father was schizophrenic (it developed rapidly in his final 20 years) and autism was apparently considered an offshoot of schizophrenia (who knows, I have not looked into it deeply enough and I'm not qualified to say). I say all this because I think the rise in autism is down to several factors. Do vaccines affect some people negatively? I wouldn't argue that is not the case, as clearly, some people have reactions. However I do think that there is an awful lot being put behind the vaccines-cause-autism thrust, when for me, there are so many other factors to consider, most of which I personally believe have more to do with the situation.
As for big-pharma, yes there is undoubtably a big business there. We've seen many times that money is made and scandals erupt (oxycontin for example). However there has been so much good and vital science and pharmaceutical research which has saved millions and millions of lives. What I think is more dangerous is virtually destroying the CDC and withdrawing support and funding for global heatlhcare and research. Stripping the working rights of DHSS workers is a terrible step. Kennedy has looked to seek more 'holistic' approaches to children's mental health issues, and whilst that sounds noble, it is at best naive and at worst dangerous to do this at the expense of reducing pharmaceutical intervention when necessary. One area I do wholly approve of what he has tried to do, is with the food pyramid reshaping, however the world is built on convenience and he is going to have to be far more adventurous in pushing this food pyramid. For example, why not get fully involved in trying to create a federal school meals program which provides healthy lunches for children? That would be a major step. The problem is his party has no interest whatsoever in spending money on it.
I am a big fan of not jumping to prescriptions every time something is 'off', furthermore, I am a big fan of taking care of your own health as responsibly as possible. Diet, exercise, moderate if any alcohol, all that good stuff. Equally, I take several medications and have done for over a decade. These help assist me in maintaining my health.
I could (as you have doubtless gauged LOL) go on.
It's an interesting discussion.
I can see why Kennedy got some people onside, yet I cannot help but view him as an utterly untrustworthy charlatan.