Vaccines take center stage at federal autism advisory committee

Vaccines took center stage at the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) meeting on Thursday, as committee members explicitly named vaccination as a possible autism trigger. Laura Cellini, founder and CEO of Elucidate ASD, said, “We don’t want to close the door for any potential trigger, and that would include things like glutamate or aspirin, or a vaccination… This plan closes no door.” Vaccines are not mentioned in the committee’s new strategic plan, which was the meeting’s stated focus, but multiple public members blamed vaccines for their children’s “regression” into autism. None of the committee members challenged those statements, which Greg Robinson, director of public policy at the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, called a sign of a “new normal” on the committee. Robinson, who is autistic, referenced the two measles deaths in Pennsylvania and said, “We are seeing right now the harms that come from misinformation around vaccines.”

The committee’s vaccine comments are unsurprising given that RFK Jr. reshaped the IACC in January with members aligned with his views. In response, autism researchers created a similarly named independent body to counter expected misinformation. The new strategic plan radically shifts from the prevailing genetics-first approach to autism, instead funding research into areas with less scientific evidence such as diet, inflammation, metabolic stress, and folate. It also calls for nearly doubling federal autism funding from $390 million to $747 million. Committee members voted to approve the plan, which will serve as nonbinding recommendations for Congress and federal health agencies.

The approval process drew swift backlash. IACC chair Sylvia Fogel said during opening remarks, “In every year this committee met [previously], roughly three of every four comments urged this committee to act. Urgency is not new. Acting is,” to applause. However, Fogel announced the 336-page plan on July 17, giving the public only three days to read and submit comments. A slew of autism advocacy and research organizations subsequently applied public pressure, and the committee has faced criticism for a lack of transparency during its initial meeting and while seeking public comments.