RFK Jr.'s loathesome edits: CDC website now falsely links vaccines and autism
Mood
controversial
Sentiment
negative
Category
news
Key topics
Vaccines
Autism
Cdc
Misinformation
Health
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
54m
Peak period
22
Day 1
Avg / period
12
Based on 24 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 20, 2025 at 1:28 PM EST
3d ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 20, 2025 at 2:21 PM EST
54m after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
22 comments in Day 1
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 23, 2025 at 9:33 PM EST
5h ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
The government put up a poster that says vaccines bad very autism and maybe the right response is to just ignore it. This admin seems to be fueled by outrage and very loud showy public displays of basically nothing when you get down to it. Cool story RFK, anyway moving on.
There's plenty of real stuff this admin is doing to respond to; focusing on the performative nonsense that exists seemingly to keep them 'winning' in the news cycle to their base might just be wasting your breath.
There's a huge difference between the seriousness of "the official disease control of the US government" saying some nonsense and "random citizens yelling in the street" doing so.
> Is anything gained by acknowledging them at all?
Is there anything gained by ignoring them?
I'm sure it won't seem very performative to the kids who aren't vaccinated and get sick, or autistic folks who don't appreciate the correlation.
> plenty of real stuff this admin is doing to respond to
I'm sure we can respond to at least 2 things.
People my age probably remember the classic 90s “food pyramid” in school and on the back of sugared cereal boxes — it pushed empty carbs as the the foundation of a healthy diet.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rebuilding-the-fo...
Up to 70% of people on the autism spectrum are considered high functioning, requiring minimal to moderate support. That's the other insulting thing about it - the fact that the worst autistic outcomes (nonverbal, low IQ, etc.) are used to represent the whole of the population.
The whole thing is gross. Say somehow you could eliminate autism spectrum disorder - there goes half your IT staff.
So people should suffer having a neurodevelopment disorder for the sake of serving computer systems?
That seems pretty gross.
I'm mildly autistic and I like the way I am. Really. I don't consider it a disability at all; it's got pros and cons, but for every thing that I'm worse at than a "normal" person, I feel there's something else equally valuable I'm better at, so it balances out as a slight positive for me and a big positive for humanity because, as the OP alluded to, diversity enables specialisation.
The issue is of course some people genuinely experience autism as a disability, and the more severe it is, the more likely that is to be the case. But you can make a solid argument that autism is not necessarily disability: like height, gigantism is unhealthy, but being tall can be adaptive!
However, I’d much rather not have to deal with it in the first place, and if I could be changed, I’d happily change.
If we can avoid future generations having to deal with it at this same relatively high rate, great.
Imagine if any other topic were treated like this. “Nah no need to investigate any more, enough people have said they’re satisfied.” Such a person would rightly be scoffed at.
22 more comments available on Hacker News
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.