We now have a working theory on how autism develops — a genetic predisposition allowing malfunction in cell danger response — and an almost miraculous clinical treatment for it in children that is currently undergoing trials.

Oh my God this is going to be an ethical minefield the likes of which we have never seen, and I say that as someone who has Autism. Like right now people on the Spectrum, as well as people with conditions like ADHD, are looking at the things RJK Jr is saying not just about Autism but Neurodivergency in general and getting very worried. Like he's saying people on adderal should be sent to labour camps and there should be a national register of Autistic people. Man believes people like me are an existential threat to the country. That's Nazi shit. Straight up fucking Eugenics for Neurodiverse people in general. The idea of an "Autism Cure" like this could very well turn into something we really do not want to see and I think we need to understand that.

Like here's the thing: I'm not one of those "Autism is my Superpower" types. It's an annoying, frustrating, horrible disability that fucks with me everyday in ways even I understand. But while it is horrible, and has fucked me six ways from Sunday, I also have to admit that without it, I would be a vastly different person and not in a good way. Without Autism, I would not have had a history degree, I would not have the hobbies, interests and knowledge I have, I wouldn't have had the impact I have had on the world or the ideas I have had. Fuck, would I be writing this comment if I didn't have the 'tism?

I'll also be honest with you, Autism, while being a disability also likely gave us a lot of people who did a lot of things they wouldn't have otherwise done if they weren't on the spectrum. I might be speculating with a lot of these figures, but Newton, Einstein, Turing, Babbage, Cavendish, Lovelace? What would the world be like if they weren't Autistic? I don't think they would've done a lot of what they had done if they were not. I'm not sure computers would exist without Autistic people, nor do I believe a lot of science and art would exist too.

Also, how are we defining Autism. We go back to the days of Hans Aspberger, who invented a condition to say "yeah, they have the 'Tism, but they're useful"?

It's a bit like if you gave a bigot the ability to wipe and entire group from reality and they chose gay people, and then suddenly they notice the phone in their pocket has disappeared and there's no internet.

malfunction

Ehhh... Maybe it just functions differently. Not really big on the negative connotation there.

The world would be a much more boring place without our autistic friend. They don't need a fucking "cure."

That sounds like...something an obscure ancient Greek philosopher would claim, leading Diogenes to start chasing him around the room counting down.

Aerobic exercise elevates your heartbeat while you're doing it but slows it even more when you're not doing it. So your fixed quota of heartbeats lasts longer (assuming there is a more or less fixed quota, which seems well-supported by evidence).

It kinda does... Not like, literally, but generally? In a statistical, mean time to failure kind of way? It's surprisingly accurate

These people, like always, just take a nugget of truth and use it to come to wild conclusions. Because there's a second, very important factor in this equation - exercise reduces your heart rate

Among mammals, there is an inverse semilogarithmic relation between heart rate and life expectancy. The product of these variables, namely, the number of heart beats/lifetime, should provide a mathematical expression that defines for each species a predetermined number of heart beats in a lifetime. Plots of the calculated number of heart beats/lifetime among mammals against life expectancy and body weight (allometric scale of 0.5 x 10(6)) are, within an order of magnitude, remarkably constant and average 7.3 +/- 5.6 x 10(8) heart beats/lifetime. A study of universal biologic scaling and mortality suggests that the basal energy consumption/body atom per heart beat is the same in all animals (approximately 10(-8) O2 molecules/heart beat). These data yield a mean value of 10 x 10(8) heart beats/lifetime and suggest that life span is predetermined by basic energetics of living cells and that the apparent inverse relation between life span and heart rate reflects an epiphenomenon in which heart rate is a marker of metabolic rate. Thus, the question of whether human life can be extended by cardiac slowing remains moot and most likely will only be resolved by retrospective analyses of large populations, future animal studies and clinical trials using bradycardic therapy.

Here's the study