The Cause of Autism

 By Juan Fermin

If It's Not the Vaccines, Then What Is It?

As a parent navigating the world of autism, I've often found myself questioning the rapid rise in diagnoses. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, autism was estimated to affect around 1 to 3 in 10,000 children in the U.S. Fast forward to today, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that about 1 in 31 children aged 8 years—roughly 3.2%—are identified with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). That's a staggering increase, from roughly 0.01–0.03% to over 3%. Whenever I bring up vaccines as a possible factor, the response is immediate and intense: "There's no proof!" People point to extensive studies showing no causal link between vaccines and autism.

Fair enough—science has repeatedly debunked that connection. But here's where it gets frustrating: If we're so confident it's not vaccines, why haven't we poured the same resources into uncovering what is driving this surge? It feels like the conversation stops at "not vaccines," without pushing further. And let's be real—there's a massive system incentivizing vaccination from day one. Hospitals, doctors, and pharma companies get reimbursed for vaccinating kids, even without insurance. Take the hepatitis B vaccine, given to nearly every newborn in the U.S. on their first day of life. Before widespread vaccination, hepatitis B infections in infants were rare outside of high-risk groups like those born to infected mothers or in communities with drug use or prostitution. Yet, the policy is universal to catch undiagnosed maternal infections and prevent chronic liver disease later in life—up to 90% of infected infants develop lifelong issues without the shot. It's a preventive measure, but for most low-risk babies, is it truly urgent right at birth?

So, okay—let's assume it's not the vaccines. Then what is it? Autism doesn't just happen in a vacuum. Research points to a mix of genetics and environmental factors, but the explosive rise suggests something in our modern world is tipping the scales. Part of the increase is undoubtedly due to better awareness, broader diagnostic criteria, and improved screening—changes that started in the 1990s and explain much of the "epidemic." But even experts acknowledge there might be a real uptick beyond that. Here are some alternative culprits worth investigating, based on emerging research:

1. Mercury and "Forever Chemicals" (PFAS) in Our Food and Environment

Our food supply is loaded with contaminants like mercury (from fish and pollution) and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), those persistent chemicals in packaging, cookware, and water. Studies have linked prenatal and childhood exposure to PFAS with increased odds of autism traits or diagnoses in some cases. Mercury, too, shows associations in certain research, potentially disrupting brain development. These toxins accumulate over time—could decades of buildup be affecting kids more now?

2. Ultra-Processed Foods and Dietary Shifts

The average Western diet is dominated by processed foods high in sugars, preservatives, and carbs. Some research suggests preservatives like propionic acid (PPA), used to prevent mold in breads and packaged goods, could play a role when consumed during pregnancy, potentially altering fetal brain development and increasing autism risk. Kids with autism often prefer these foods, which might exacerbate symptoms, but the prenatal link is intriguing. Inflammation from poor nutrition could be a factor.

3. Iodine Deficiency in Modern Diets

We've cut back on iodine in the U.S. due to outdated fears from faulty studies, leading to mild deficiencies in many people. Iodine is crucial for thyroid function and brain development—deficiency can cause cognitive issues. Contrast that with Okinawa, Japan, where high seaweed intake provides about 12.5 mg of iodine daily (far above U.S. recommendations), contributing to their exceptional longevity and health. Could our low-iodine diets be leaving developing brains vulnerable?

4. Delayed Childbearing and Older Parental Age

Women are having kids later—prime reproductive years (19–24) are often delayed for careers until 30–40. Advanced maternal (and paternal) age is one of the strongest non-genetic risk factors for autism, with risks rising significantly: for example, mothers over 40 up to a 77% higher risk compared to those under 25, according to some studies. Mutations accumulate with age, potentially increasing ASD odds. The longer women delay child bearing, the higher the risk. Yet we NEVER tell this to young women! Is a career MORE Important than a healthy child?

5. Artificial Folic Acid Fortification and Folate Issues

We fortify foods with synthetic folic acid to prevent birth defects, but for people with MTHFR gene variants (common in up to 40% of the population), it might not convert properly to active folate, leading to buildup of unmetabolized folic acid. Some studies suggest this could interfere with methylation and raise autism risk, though evidence is mixed—natural folates (from food) or active forms like 5-MTHF might be better.

Why Aren't We Looking Harder? The Systemic Bias Problem

These aren't proven causes, but they're plausible leads backed by science. The real issue? Our system might be rigged against questioning too deeply. Take Andrew Wakefield—the doctor who tried linking MMR vaccines to autism. His flawed study got retracted, his license revoked, and he was essentially driven out of mainstream medicine. Sure, there were ethical issues, but when vaccine studies are often funded by manufacturers or agencies with industry ties, it smells like a double standard.

Agencies like the FDA and NIH aren't entirely independent either. The FDA gets 45–75% of its drug review budget from industry user fees, creating a "customer" dynamic. The NIH, while mostly taxpayer-funded, has patent royalty systems where scientists like Anthony Fauci have profited indirectly from inventions (e.g., HIV-related patents yielding royalties, even if donated to charity for tax benefits). Fauci's ties include perks like covered travel and prestige from industry events. It's a big circle: public research leads to patents, licensed to pharma, royalties flow back—rewarding the status quo.

If challenging vaccines gets you "mowed down," who's incentivized to probe these other factors? We need unbiased research, full transparency on conflicts, and reforms like banning inventor royalties or stricter funding separations.

Our children deserve answers beyond "it's not that." What do you think is behind the rise? Share in the comments—let's keep the conversation going.