Rabbitt Malone has recently written an article on vaccines and autism: Neuroscience, Vaccines, and Autism: "What Science Actually Says and Doesn’t Say: An honest look at vaccine biology, autism research, and a hypothesis that may offer real hope for families of nonspeaking children."
He sums up the current situation:
WHERE THE QUESTION REMAINS GENUINELY OPEN
Regressive autism is different. Roughly 20 to 30 percent of autistic children appear to develop typically and then lose skills, often language and social engagement, somewhere between 12 and 24 months of age. This regression is real, documented, and poorly understood. Its timing does overlap with the vaccine schedule. And it is worth saying plainly: the parents who report watching their child change in the days and weeks following vaccination are not, as a group, confused or misremembering. Regression happens. The timing they describe is real. The unresolved scientific question is not whether the regression occurred but what caused it.
This distinction matters. For too long, the response from the medical establishment has been to challenge the parents’ account rather than to engage the mechanism. That is not good science, and it has damaged trust in ways that will take a long time to repair. The honest position is to acknowledge the reported pattern, take it seriously as an observation, and invest in the research needed to understand it.
Autistic brains, examined postmortem, show neuroinflammatory signatures, activated microglia, elevated cytokines, and white matter abnormalities [4,5]. These findings are consistent with what you might expect from microvascular injury, though they almost certainly have other explanations as well. The point is not that vaccines caused these findings, but that the brain biology of autism involves immune and vascular components that researchers are still working to understand.
We do not fully understand regressive autism. Ruling out postnatal contributions on political rather than scientific grounds would itself be a failure of honest inquiry.
The most credible narrow claim, and it is narrow, is that in a subgroup of children with underlying immune or metabolic vulnerabilities, a strong immune activation event, possibly including vaccination, could act as a trigger for neurological regression in children already on a susceptible developmental trajectory. This has not been demonstrated. It has not been ruled out.
