Dad says 5-year-old develops autism after being forced to get 18 vaccines in 1 day

From LifeSiteNews

By Michael Nevradakis Ph. D., The Defender

As part of a custody battle, a Tennessee judge ordered a family to vaccinate all three of their children, all of whom had never been vaccinated. Five-year-old Isaac immediately became ill and was eventually diagnosed with severe regressive autism.

In 2016, David Ihben moved his wife and three children from Chicago to Jamestown, in rural Tennessee, with high hopes for a new and calmer life.

But the dream turned into a nightmare for David and his children in December 2019, when divorce proceedings and a subsequent custody battle resulted in the forced vaccination of the children – and changed the family’s fortunes forever.

Ihben said his ex-wife decided “this wasn’t the life she wanted.” So they were attempting to develop a parenting plan in family court – when Tennessee judge Todd Burnett “pulled up the vaccine issue” after discovering the couple’s children were unvaccinated – and forced the parents to vaccinate their children.

Ihben’s two oldest children – daughter Hannah and son Joseph – were spared significant adverse events following their vaccination.

But his youngest son, Isaac, wasn’t so fortunate. After receiving 18 vaccines in one day, Isaac developed severe regressive autism. Today, he requires around-the-clock care.

The children’s mother soon abandoned the children, leaving Ihben to raise them as a single parent – even though he is still obliged to pay child support.

‘How can a judge force medical care without a doctor’s input?’

Ihben told The Defender his entire family was unvaccinated. “I’ve never had any. My dad was drafted by the Army in 1961, and he didn’t get any either. We’ve never vaccinated,” he said. “Our children had to sign religious exemptions for school.”

During divorce proceedings though, his wife’s attorney used the vaccination issue to drive a wedge between the parents.

“When we went to court, I guess her attorney knew that [Burnett] was a pro-vaccine judge and that’s something that they could get me on,” Ihben said.

According to Ihben, Burnett told the couple that it was his “personal opinion that not vaccinating your children is child abuse.” He then told the couple that whichever parent would be willing to vaccinate the children that same day would leave the courthouse with custody.

“I said, ‘Your Honor, we have rights. It’s between the mom and their father,’” Ihben recalled. “Her attorney whispered to her, and she goes, ‘I’ll take them down and vaccinate them today.’”

“I was so surprised, because me and my ex-wife didn’t agree on much, but we did agree on that,” Ihben said, referring to their views on vaccination.

After the hearing, Ihben and his wife were granted joint custody of the children, with their mother as their primary guardian. Later that day, the children received their childhood vaccines – and Isaac immediately became sick.

“My daughter had previous allergies … so the doctor refused to give her all in one day. They split those … She didn’t have any side effects from what I can see,” Ihben said. “[Joseph] was in the ICU for a couple of days but seems to be okay. But [Isaac] spent 12 days in the ICU, eight days with a 106-degree fever.”

Isaac, who was 5 years old at the time, was “just a normal happy kid,” Ihben said.

Today, Isaac has severe regressive autism. Ihben told The Defender:

“He doesn’t talk. He wears a diaper. He eats out of a baby bottle 20-30 times a day, he has speech therapy and will require 24-hour care and supervision for the rest of his life.

“I haven’t had a full night’s sleep in four years. He has to be changed every two hours, or he will have an accident. If you have a child with regressive autism or know someone, you will understand what our days are like.”

Ihben didn’t learn about Isaac’s injuries right away, because the court initially slapped him with a six-month restraining order. When the six months were up, he finally made plans to pick up his children for “two-hour supervised visitation” at a local McDonald’s.

“My youngest comes walking out and I’m like, ‘What’s going on?’” He said his oldest children then told him about what happened to Isaac. “My children told me everything that’s going on. Basically, nobody’s given me information. I had to go off what 10- and 11-year-olds were telling me,” Ihben said.

Ihben tried to find out what happened to Isaac – but encountered more obstacles at Cookeville Regional Medical Center, his local hospital. “The judge had sealed the hospital records. I still cannot get them,” he said.

It wasn’t until he enrolled his daughter in high school that, while obtaining her records from the local health department, he had a chance to view Isaac’s records. That’s when he saw that Isaac had received 18 vaccines in one day.

“How can a judge force medical care without a doctor’s input?” Ihben asked. “I don’t think judges should be dictating medical treatment from the bench.”

According to Ihben, doctors at Vanderbilt University in Nashville said Isaac’s injuries “are a direct result from forced vaccination,” with one doctor telling Ihben that “she’s seen only one other kid that acts like Isaac does.”

Required to continue paying child support, despite mother’s disappearance

Soon after seeing his children for the first time after the custody battle, another surprise was in store for Ihben and his family: Ihben’s ex-wife called to say she and the children had been evicted.

After he kept the children for a week, their mother “got a free house, everything furnished and paid,” and the children were returned to her.

“Then she got evicted from there” in May 2020, Ihben said. He again picked up the children – but that was the last they saw of their mother. According to Ihben, after her second eviction, she left town without a trace.

“We haven’t heard from her or seen her,” Ihben said. “It’ll be five years in May.”

Ihben still pays child support to the state, even though he alone takes care of the children. He said the child support money, which remains uncollected, goes to a state fund – and, if it remains unclaimed, will be confiscated by the state when the children reach adulthood.

Ihben said that though he has gone to court to request full custody of his children or a reduction of his child support payments, he has faced a catch-22 situation.

“The judge said, I can’t do anything unless you get her here in front of me,” Ihben said. “I was like, ‘I’ve served her. Nobody knows where she is.’”

Ihben said he believes the children’s mother didn’t realize Isaac was going to be hurt so badly, and “she just can’t face it.” He added, “I just don’t understand, if she’s been gone almost five years, why she still has full custody, why I still have to pay child support.”

Tennessee laws, local officials pose challenges for raising Isaac

Ihben described the day-to-day realities of caring for Isaac, who will turn 11 next month and just started the fifth grade in a special education program. He said:

“Our lives have changed forever. I can’t have a regular job. I pick up stuff here and there … I have an alarm that goes off every two hours to change Isaac. He eats in the middle of the night … We live out in the country. There’s no bus, so I take him to school back and forth.

“He doesn’t talk, so you don’t know if he’s sick, if he’s upset, if he’s hungry, if he’s cold, if he has a stomach ache … I’ve got a mental list, and I just check it off and hopefully I hit the one that calms him and provides what he needs.”

State rules also pose obstacles. “You’re not allowed to have home healthcare for a disabled child unless you have no other children in the home under 18,” Ihben said.

Ihben noted that Tennessee ranks among the states with the lowest level of funding for autistic children, adding that autistic children are frequently mistreated.

“Our local school district has restraint chairs for autistic children. They are allowed to put Isaac in a chair, to pepper spray him, to tase him. Police departments have no training for dealing with autistic children,” Ihben said.

Ihben said state, county and town officials have attempted to intimidate him and his family.

According to Ihben, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) showed up at his home on Dec. 5, 2023. “Somebody starts beating on the door … there’s a truck at the end of the road, a truck at the end of the other road and two trucks in the driveway. They had assault weapons.”

Ihben said the officers claimed that a social worker wanted to speak with him, but that he refused to open his door for them. He submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the state to find out why his home was raided, but was told there are “no records of anything.”

The TBI raid took a toll on him. “I had a heart attack that night,” he said. “I couldn’t breathe.” He said the incident still affects him today. “I’m sure I have PTSD from it. I’m still under treatment,” Ihben said.

In June 2023, Ihben said he went to his county commission meeting to tell them about what happened to his family. The county commissioner, Jimmy Johnson, left him a voicemail warning him not to hold any rally or protest.

“The commissioner called the sheriff,” Ihben said, but ultimately “they backed off.”

In another incident, Ihben said he was banned from his local Walmart store after a store manager called the police because Isaac “was causing a disturbance.” This obliged Ihben to shop at another Walmart, an hour away from his home.

Ihben said it’s also difficult to find a lawyer to represent him and his family. “No attorney is willing to take on the judge.”

Local officials ‘tried to scare us’ into not doing Vax-Unvax bus interview

Ihben credited CHD and its Tennessee Chapter for helping him and his family. “We wouldn’t be here without CHD helping us out,” Ihben said. “The Tennessee Chapter has helped us out a lot.”

Ihben said he recently saw “Vaxxed 3” with members of the state’s CHD chapter. “What we have to live through every day is horrible, but it could be worse,” Ihben said, citing stories in the film of children who died post-vaccination.

According to Ihben, his efforts to promote CHD initiatives in his community, such as the visit of the Vax-Unvax bus earlier this year, have also been met with intimidation.

“We put a little flyer together [for the Vax-Unvax bus] and we started passing it out,” Ihben said. But on Feb. 1, the day of his bus interview, Ihben said his wife’s attorney, her husband – who is the attorney for the local school board – and Burnett, who mobilized the TBI, “tried to scare us into not doing the bus interview.”

Getting the word out, spreading the message is ‘the only weapon we have’

Isaac has recently shown some improvement, according to Ihben. “He’s doing better slowly … He’s in a lot of therapy. He’s starting to write some numbers and letters on his own. Teachers think he’s reading, but he’s still never said a word.”

Ihben said this has been a learning experience for his oldest children, who will “have to take care of Isaac every day” after his death. “That’s a lifetime commitment.”

Another silver lining, according to Ihben, is that Isaac’s story has become a learning experience for his family and many members of his local community.

“This hasn’t just got me learning. My kids are learning. Hannah and Joseph are learning about their government and their food and their environment. They’re teaching their friends about this.”

For Ihben, getting the word out and spreading the message is “the only weapon we have.” He said, “It’s powerful that my kids’ friends come up and say ‘we’re sorry for what happened to you, we’ve seen the [Vax-Unvax] interview.’”

Ihben said he hopes the message will help other children avoid Isaac’s fate. “I hope Isaac will be the last,” he said.

This article was originally published by The Defender – Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Related Topics:#DrMichaelNevradakis #LifeSiteNews #TheDefender 18VaccinationsInOneDay VaccinesAutism

Up Next

Trudeau’s pro-transgender regime is a get-out-of-jail-free card for Canada’s most violent criminals

Don't Miss

At-large Iranian man charged in plot to assassinate Trump

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Covid Cover-Ups: Excess Deaths, Vaccine Harms, and Coordinated Censorship

Energy / 4 hours ago

Here’s what they don’t tell you about BC’s tanker ban

Daily Caller / 4 hours ago

BREAKING: Globalist Climate Conference Bursts Into Flames

Health

CDC’s Autism Reversal: Inside the Collapse of a 25‑Year Public Health Narrative

Published on November 20, 2025

Todayville

Popular Rationalism

James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, for Popular Rationalism

On November 19, 2025, quietly and without ceremony, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its website and rewrote one of the most politically charged sentences in modern American medicine. A sentence that had been treated as gospel—“Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”—was suddenly recast as something far more fragile. In the CDC’s own words, the slogan “is not an evidence‑based statement” because available studies “have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism.”

Yet the headline still sits atop the page. Not because the CDC stands behind it, but because a U.S. Senator demanded it stay. CDC states plainly that the headline remains only due to an agreement with the chair of the Senate HELP Committee. A mandated political slogan now presides over a scientific reversal.

The body of the page reads like a confession. It acknowledges that key infant vaccines—including HepB, DTaP, Hib, PCV13, IPV, rotavirus, and influenza—have never been studied for autism outcomes. It admits that earlier studies used to justify the categorical claim were incapable of ruling out causation. It concedes that mechanistic and associative findings were ignored by health authorities. And it promises, for the first time, an HHS‑led effort to conduct “gold‑standard science” to evaluate whether early‑life vaccination can contribute to autism.

This moment did not arise in a vacuum. It is the final surface rupture of a 25‑year fault line running beneath CDC’s public messaging—a story of suppressed signals, discarded testimony, unpublished findings, internal dissent, FOIA‑released emails, whistleblower documents, and a lawsuit that forced CDC to walk back its own claim once before

The Early Warnings CDC Never Told the Public

In July 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Public Health Service issued a joint public statement urging the reduction or elimination of thimerosal in childhood vaccines. The stated reason was “an abundance of caution.” But in internal memos from FDA scientists revealed something more urgent: infants receiving vaccines according to the CDC schedule were exposed to mercury levels far exceeding EPA safety limits.

Behind the scenes, the alarm was palpable; in public, the message was reassurance.

One year later, in June 2000, CDC convened a closed‑door meeting at the Simpsonwood Retreat Center near Atlanta. The meeting brought together CDC officials, vaccine company representatives, and outside consultants to review early analyses from the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD). The transcript—obtained via Safeminds by FOIA—shows CDC epidemiologist Thomas Verstraeten presenting a dose‑dependent association between thimerosal exposure and neurodevelopmental disorders, with findings concerning enough that multiple attendees warned of “what this will mean” if made public.

In the months that followed, internal CDC emails—eventually released through persistent FOIA litigation—show Verstraeten repeating the same refrain: “It just won’t go away.” The association persisted despite multiple rounds of analytical restructuring.

But as the signal persisted, the public narrative hardened: vaccines are safe, and no link to autism exists.

2001: The IOM Frames the Outcome Before Reviewing the Evidence

In January 2001, the Institute of Medicine’s Immunization Safety Review Committee met to determine how it would approach vaccines‑and‑autism questions. The committee made two decisions that shaped every subsequent conclusion.

First, the IOM reported they would not review experimental animal data or mechanistic toxicology because the committee did not have “a free weekend” to do so.

Second, as revealed in the same transcript, the chair, Harvard pediatrician Marie McCormick, stated that CDC “wants us to declare” vaccines safe and that the committee was “not ever going to come down that autism is a true side effect.”

Study director Kathleen Stratton added that the predetermined outcome—“inadequate to accept or reject”—was the result “Walt wants,” referring to Walter Orenstein, then head of CDC’s National Immunization Program.

These statements were later entered into the Congressional Record.

The outcome—before any evidence was evaluated—was set.

The Verstraeten Disappearance

In 2002, before CDC’s thimerosal paper was published in Pediatrics, lead author Thomas Verstraeten left CDC to work for GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a company producing thimerosal‑containing vaccines. The conflict was not disclosed in the paper.

2004: How Testimony and Mechanisms Were Removed

The IOM’s 2004 report on vaccines and autism excluded parental accounts of regression, mechanistic submissions detailing neuroimmune pathways, autism evidence involving vaccines other than the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine and the growing literature on thimerosal‑related neurotoxicity.

Although the committee acknowledged that vaccines might trigger autism in a small biologically susceptible subset, it declared such a possibility insufficient to justify further research. It was the line CDC and AAP repeated for years.

At the same moment, statistician C.P. Farrington issued a methodological warning about the self‑controlled case series (SCCS) method—central to CDC’s MMR studies—explaining that SCCS can mask population‑level effects. This concern fell on deaf ears.

2007–2008: The Poling Precedent

In the Hannah Poling case, the federal government formally conceded via NVICP summaries that vaccines triggered a mitochondrial encephalopathy that manifested as autism.

This was the government’s first—and still one of its only—acknowledgments that vaccine‑induced autism can occur in a susceptible individual.

2014: The Whistleblower

CDC senior scientist Dr. William Thompson released a statement admitting that statistically significant findings related to MMR timing, race, and autism were omitted from a 2004 CDC study. His statement is preserved in the webarchive.

In 2015, Congressman Bill Posey read Thompson’s documents into the Congressional Record. In that same year, the groundbreaking documentary VAXXED reviewed the manipulation and destruction of data by CDC employees to bury the strong association of on-time MMR vaccination

2017: HHS Admits It Never Performed Required Vaccine Safety Reviews

Under pressure from a sweeping FOIA request, HHS disclosed that it had not performed the periodic vaccine safety reviews required under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury.

2017–2023: Aluminum, Microglia, and the Rewriting of Neuroimmunology

A growing scientific literature revealed significant concerns that aluminum in vaccines may play a increasing role: aluminum brain retention, macrophagic myofasciitis, dose‑dependent aluminum toxicity and toxicokinetic and clearance concerns.

Simultaneously, in a landmark review, the HHS Inspector General confirmed extraordinary underreporting in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System.

These findings undermined the assumption that injected aluminum rapidly clears the body.

2018–2024: Maternal Immune Activation (MIA), IL‑6, and Autism Biology

Research on maternal immune activation reshaped autism biology indicates a direct role IL‑6–driven microglial priming, microglial dysregulation and pruning deficits, and immune‑activation neurodevelopmental changes.

These pathways perfectly match parental reports of regression following immune triggers, including fever and vaccination.

The 2018 IPAK Systematic Review

A systematic analysis by the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge (IPAK) examined 48 studies used by CDC and AAP to support the “vaccines do not cause autism” claim. The full report found that the key studies sent to President Trump in his first term, the average study quality score was –6.61 (on a scale where +12 represents a robust design); only one study scored above zero; most did not measure autism prevalence; none compared vaccinated vs. never‑vaccinated children; nearly all were retrospective correlation studies, unable to test causation. many were underpowered, overadjusted, or structurally incapable of detecting subgroups; and that studies showing associations were absent from CDC’s curated lists.

The Lawsuit That Forced CDC’s First Retraction

In the late 2010s, the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN), led by Del Bigtree, filed a Data Quality Act challenge demanding CDC produce evidence that all vaccines on the infant schedule do not cause autism. CDC could not produce such evidence. The slogan was removed.

Under court order, the slogan was reinstated—until CDC’s 2025 update disavowed it again although the header remains as a purely political concession.

CDC’s 2025 Admission: The Narrative Has Collapsed

CDC now acknowledges that many infant vaccines have never been studied for autism. The website correctly reports that observational studies used to date cannot rule out causation. It also reports that mechanistic pathways were not evaluated. Most importantly, it reports that evidence showing association was ignored or suppressed.

The header, “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”, sticks out like a sore thumb, a\ reminder that it exists only because a U.S. Senator demanded it stay.

This is more than scientific refinement; it is a reckoning.

What Gold‑Standard Science Would Actually Require

A real determination about vaccines and autism would require a mix of retrospective prospective cohorts with fully unvaccinated controls. Genetic susceptibility profiling would be tracked with vaccine exposure and machine learning prediction modeling used to study exactly which risk factors could have predicted who would have developed autism. The prediction models optimized retrospectively would be to test prospectively and autism rates compared in kids removed from the vaccine schedule via clinical risk prediction.

Parents as Witnesses

For decades, parents have described regression events following vaccination—loss of language, eye contact, sociability, and developmental progress. CDC now admits these observations have never been properly studied.

These accounts are no longer anomalies—they align with known pathways of neuroimmune disruption.

Conclusion

CDC’s 2025 update is not a scientific conclusion. It is a confession of malfeasance by an organization whose entire paradigm on vaccine risk has not risk management, but rather, risk perception manipulation.

The question was never settled in spite of sufficient evidence that the correct studies are warranted.

“Gold‑standard science” is coming—twenty‑five years late. CDC is not changing its language because new evidence emerged. It is changing its language because the evidence it once relied upon was never sufficient to justify the claim.

Share

Popular Rationalism is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Subscribe to Popular Rationalsim

Health

BREAKING: CDC quietly rewrites its vaccine–autism guidance

Published on November 20, 2025

Todayville

Maryanne Demasi, reports

In a stunning shift, the CDC now says its own “vaccines don’t cause autism” claim was not evidence-based.

For the first time in a generation, the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has rewritten its official position on whether vaccines can cause autism.

This is a change that could reshape one of the most politically charged and emotionally fraught debates in modern medicine.

In a website update published on 19 November 2025, the agency now states that the long-standing claim “vaccines do not cause autism” is “not an evidence-based claim” because scientific studies “have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines cause autism.”

The page also acknowledges that “studies supporting a link have been ignored by health authorities.”

It’s difficult to overstate the significance of these statements. For nearly two decades, they would have been unthinkable for a federal public health agency.

The timing is equally striking.

The change arrives at a moment when the political and scientific landscape around vaccine safety is undergoing a marked shift inside the Trump–Kennedy administration.

For months, critics have accused Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr and several of the administration’s appointees of holding unconventional views on vaccine safety.

The CDC’s revised language now places the agency closer to Kennedy’s long-standing argument that federal agencies had ignored crucial evidence.

The CDC explains the shift by pointing to the Data Quality Act, which requires federal communications to accurately reflect the evidence.

Because studies have not excluded the possibility that infant vaccines could contribute to autism, the agency concedes that its long-standing categorical statement was not scientifically justified.

The update states plainly that scientific uncertainty remains, particularly for vaccines administered in the first year of life.

Scientific uncertainty finally acknowledged

The information on the website draws a sharp distinction between the infant vaccine schedule — which includes DTaP, HepB, Hib, IPV, PCV and others — and the measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccine.

For the MMR, the CDC continues to cite observational evidence showing “no association … with autism spectrum disorders,” describing the conclusion as supported by “high strength of evidence.”

But the agency also acknowledges that these studies had “serious methodological limitations” and were all retrospective epidemiological analyses, the type that cannot establish cause and effect or identify subgroups who may be more vulnerable.

The acknowledgement of limitations is unusually candid for a federal agency discussing vaccines and autism.

For the infant vaccine schedule, the shift is even more dramatic.

The CDC cites a series of authoritative reviews — including the 1991 and 2012 Institute of Medicine’s assessments, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s review in 2021 — all concluding that the evidence was “inadequate to accept or reject” a causal relationship between early-life vaccines and autism.

In other words, the fundamental scientific question remains unresolved.

Political dynamite

The political context makes this change even more consequential. Senator Bill Cassidy, who chairs the Senate Health Committee, has been one of the most vocal critics of Kennedy’s vaccine views.

*Senator Bill Cassidy at Robert F Kennedy Jr’s confirmation hearing Jan 2025*

Cassidy has repeatedly insisted that the science on autism and vaccination was settled years ago. Now the CDC states that the claim “vaccines do not cause autism” does not meet evidence standards.

Remarkably, the CDC states that the headline phrase remains on the page only “due to an agreement with the chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.”

The implication — that the wording is a political compromise rather than a scientific one — will undoubtedly invite scrutiny on Capitol Hill.

Attorney Aaron Siri, who has spent years litigating against federal agencies for greater transparency around vaccine safety, said the update marks a long overdue shift in honesty from the CDC.

*Attorney Aaron Siri, managing partner at Siri & Glimstad LLP and author of Vaccines Amen*

“It is an excellent step in the right direction for CDC to start telling the truth to the public about its past misdeeds and misrepresentations,” said Siri.

“Telling the truth and apologizing for its prior misrepresentations is the only way the CDC will ever rebuild trust with the public,” he added.

How the Wakefield saga shaped debate

For years, any attempt to revisit the vaccine–autism question was coloured by the fallout from the “Wakefield saga.”

The retracted 1998 Lancet paper became a shorthand for misinformation, and it allowed public health agencies to dismiss all subsequent concerns as if they were simply a continuation of that controversy.

The episode became a kind of cultural firewall.

Invoking Wakefield was an easy way to shut down inquiry, even when parents were describing patterns that had nothing to do with the MMR vaccine and everything to do with the expanding infant schedule.

The CDC’s admission that the evidence for early-life vaccines is “inadequate to accept or reject” a causal link — and that some studies “supporting a link have been ignored” — breaks the long-standing habit of waving away legitimate questions by pointing back to a decades-old scandal.

A broad recalibration

The CDC’s shift also aligns with a broader recalibration underway across federal health agencies in the US.

The Trump administration has ordered new NIH reviews of vaccine safety science, reinstated the Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines, and rejuvenated the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

The pattern is unmistakable: agencies that once treated certain questions as “settled science” are now reopening them and its impact is likely to reverberate across the globe.

The CDC now admits the science has not ruled out potential links for vaccines given in infancy.

The website also notes that “about one in two surveyed parents of children with autism” believe vaccination played a role, often pointing to shots given in the first months of life or around the one-year mark.

Until now, those parents were often told their concerns were baseless. The agency’s new wording fundamentally alters that dynamic.

Changing the conversation

In the US at least, public health agencies will no longer be able to respond to parental concerns with blanket denials.

Moreover, researchers studying plausible mechanisms — such as aluminium adjuvants, neuroinflammation, mitochondrial vulnerabilities and immune activation — will find themselves in an environment that formally recognises these questions as scientifically legitimate.

Informed consent practices may need to be revisited as the existence of uncertainty is formally acknowledged.

And lawmakers who insisted that the science was settled will now face uncomfortable questions about why federal agencies relied on definitive messaging that did not meet evidence standards.

To be clear — the CDC’s update does NOT assert that vaccines cause autism. What it does say — with clarity the agency has avoided for years — is that the available evidence has not established that they do not, at least for the vaccines given in early infancy.

That distinction may seem subtle, but it represents a profound shift in how the conversation is framed and will undoubtedly impact the personal experiences of families raising autistic children.

For the first time that I can remember, the question of vaccines and autism is no longer treated as taboo. It has been recast — at the CDC’s own hand — as a research question that demands proper investigation.

The shift may prove to be one of the most consequential public health developments of the decade, and it suggests that something significant is moving behind the scenes in the federal agencies that once seemed immovable.