Since vaccines don’t cause autism, microdosing them simply means more visits to the doctor, more injections for the child, and a longer period of vulnerability. Nothing about this makes any sense.
Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) profile pictureAaron Rupar
@atruparSep 18
Trump: "We're also going to be demanding the drug companies, with respect to a certain situation -- the autism -- that they make their doses in 20% shots. So you have shot 1, shot 2, shot 3, shot 4, shot 5 ... I think you're gonna see a massive reduction in autism"

Sep 19, 2026 · 2:25 PM UTC

121
446
10
2,089
55,985
RelevantRecentLikes
Trump endorsing the “vaccines cause autism” lie is also profoundly irresponsible.
4
3
1
52
1,019
Or you could just not take them at all.
2
5
369
I mean, sure. But then you’d have a whole lot of dead and ill children. And I dunno about you… but I want children alive and healthy.
1
13
187
to be extra safe, we should just go with 100 shots of 1% of the dose. Makes as much sense as anything that fat orange tub of goo ”demands”
1
1
22
520
It’s ridiculous gibberish.
9
495
Plus it is not that easy to make the dose smaller without making it useless.
2
1
14
487
💯
1
2
466
View more replies
And would they even work to elicit an immune response at such a low threshold ?
1
4
170
Great question! Would need to be studied.
1
2
164
View more replies
Let's get some proper scientific data for this new schedule. Then everyone should see a more clear path. There is ZERO scientific evidence that this new schedule WON'T help. Science should never close the door on research. Scared to try something new?
12
2
492
You research something BEFORE you implement it.
1
34
345
View more replies
Until you learn none of the vaccines have been double blind placebo studied individually or combined The vast majority have no idea what they’re talking about
1
1
151
This is, of course, a dreadful lie. Please don’t lie on my TL or you’ll be blocked.
3
7
146
View more replies
Life is a tradeoff - even traveling to the Dr for additional doses will result in incremental deaths. Having said that, the policy we recently abrogated where we only give vaccines to children when we can show a strong, predictable benefit should be brought back.
2
164
There’s a strong, predictable benefit for nearly every vaccine in nearly every child.
10
159
Lets not take vaccines at all.
2
136
Then children will die. A lot of children will die. I’m not ok with that.
1
7
129
View more replies
So….besides being absolutely made up bs, parents are supposed to take off 5 days or more as people lose insurance? Is he trying to pay off doctors?
5
96
These shit stains will be out of office before anything is changed. This is all performative nonsense prior to midterm elections.
4
58
Imbecile and Chief: Let’s listen to the raccoon eating motherfucker instead of the best doctors in the world.
1
34
In the 1960s, studies using Kanner’s narrow criteria for classic “infantile autism” typically found 0.4–0.5 cases per 1,000 children (4–5 per 10,000, or about 1 in 2,000–2,500). The best-known example is Lotter’s 1966 Middlesex survey (4.5 per 10,000). A large U.S. administrative study from the same era reported an even lower 0.7 per 10,000. These figures captured only the most severe, classic presentation. By the 2020s, the measured rate is far higher. The CDC’s ADDM Network (2022 surveillance of 8-year-olds across 16 U.S. sites, reported in 2025) found 32.2 per 1,000 (3.2%, or 1 in 31). Site-level rates ranged from about 1 in 103 to 1 in 19. Earlier ADDM snapshots were 1 in 36 (2020 data) and 1 in 44 (2018 data). Global estimates for recent years cluster around 1% in high-income child surveys and roughly 0.8% age-standardized in the 2021 Global Burden of Disease analysis. That is a roughly 60- to 80-fold increase in identified prevalence when the 1960s numbers are compared directly with current U.S. child figures
2
1
79