Autism diagnoses for children in the United States continue to rise, with the latest data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicating that one out of every 31 eight-year-olds have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The findings, published in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, are a low-key but significant improvement over previous years and come at a time when the disease is facing heightened political scrutiny, including from the administration of President Donald Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

While the CDC attributes this steady rise to improved screening, increased awareness, and broader access to diagnostic care, Kennedy has introduced fresh unsubstantiated claims of a connection between autism and exposures to the environment and vaccines—despite decades of contradiction from empirical evidence suggesting no such association. His comments have stoked controversy surrounding the causes of autism even as experts emphasize that the evidence must be reflected in more comprehensive policies and support systems, not fear or misinformation.

Is Autism Really on the Rise Or Early Detection?

In its recent report both pointing to gains in early detection and persistent issues with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) revealed that autism rates in the United States have reached an all-time high. Through 2022, approximately 1 in 31 U.S. 8-year-olds had an autism diagnosis—an increase from 1 in 36 two years before. Though some have called this a "public health epidemic," health care providers and scientists credit the trend to a more longer-term shift in diagnostic patterns, increased awareness, and increasing access to services, especially within historically disenfranchised populations.

The CDC's latest biennial surveillance report, published in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, includes a comprehensive picture of autism prevalence across the country. Using data collected from several Texas, Georgia, and California communities, the findings show significant regional variation. For example, in one San Diego metropolitan community, 1 in 19 children had been diagnosed with autism—the highest rate in the study.

Of note, these rises are not always a reflection of a rise in the prevalence of children with autism, but rather an increase in the ability to identify it, particularly at earlier stages in life. According to the CDC, enhanced screening tools, parent and pediatrician education campaigns, and community-based interventions have all contributed to this diagnostic shift.

The report comes on the heels of autism having received new political attention. President Donald Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. placed autism at the center of their healthcare agenda. Kennedy, who has long drawn criticism for linking autism with vaccines—a myth that has been often debunked by the scientific world—called the condition an "epidemic running rampant."

Contrary to Kennedy's assertions, the CDC and senior health leaders maintain that increases in autism diagnosis are primarily due to positive trends in detection and awareness, rather than an explosion of cases with environmental or medical causes.

Kennedy's call for new investigations into vaccines and autism has raised alarm among advocacy groups and scientists. The decades-long, peer-reviewed push against the myth that vaccines cause autism has demolished the trope. According to the CDC, vaccines remain safe and essential to public health.

This rhetoric does more harm than good," stated Christopher Banks, president and CEO of the Autism Society of America. "Prevalence data should drive equity and access—not fear, misinformation, or political rhetoric.".

Perhaps most notably, the CDC report highlights the growing trend of autism diagnoses in children of color. Traditionally disproportionately diagnosed in white, affluent communities, ASD increasingly is being diagnosed in Black, Hispanic, and Asian children. The trend, first reported in the 2020 CDC report, continues, a sign of growing outreach and access to care in historically underserved communities.

In fact, autism now happens less frequently in upscale neighborhoods than in socially disadvantaged communities—a reversal of the decades-ago trend. The CDC emphasized that the trend reversal is likely a result of concerted efforts to reduce gaps in early screening and diagnostic services, and not because there is any increased biological risk in some communities.

Autism remains significantly more common in boys than girls. In 2022, autism was diagnosed in boys at a rate 3.4 times higher than girls. While the disparity has lessened in recent years, scientists caution that the disparity is not wholly due to improved diagnostic practices in girls. The nuance and lower disruptive impact of ASD presentation in women—frequently more subtle and less disruptive—can still lead to underdiagnosis or misdiagnosis.

Local variation in autism prevalence also tends to correlate with the existence of early intervention services. California, for example, has an excellent program training pediatricians to screen for early signs of autism and providing state-funded regional centers for kids with developmental disorders. These models that are based within communities provide roadmaps for the enhancement of autism identification and treatment systems across the country.

Likewise, Puerto Rico's recent investment in public autism awareness campaigns had a profound influence on diagnostic rates. Children born after the island-wide early detection initiative was initiated had one of the highest rates of diagnosis among their age group, a reflection of the effectiveness of preventive public health initiatives.

While the slight uptick in autism rates may sound alarming, health professionals urge the public to interpret the numbers with caution. “This is not an epidemic,” said one CDC epidemiologist familiar with the report. “What we’re seeing is the fruit of years of advocacy, education, and systemic change.”

Experts and autism advocacy leaders reinforce that message. "This entire generation of children is not damaged," said the Autism Society's Banks. "They are being seen, heard and served more than ever before."

In 2001, Uzbekistan was far from a model of public health. The country was grappling with high hepatitis B infection rates and a fragmented healthcare system, few would have predicted that it would one day be celebrated for near elimination of the disease in children.

Yet today, reports Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, the country stands among just nine in the World Health Organization (WHO) European region to meet hepatitis B control targets. A recent nationwide survey revealed that only 0.2% of Uzbek children carry the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)—well below WHO’s 0.5% threshold.

What is Hepatitis B and Why It’s Dangerous

Hepatitis B is a viral infection that affects the liver. While some infections are brief and symptom-free, others can become chronic, quietly progressing over years to cause liver failure or cancer. The risk of chronic infection is especially high in infants whose immune systems are still developing.

Fortunately, the hepatitis B vaccine is highly effective, offering 98–100% protection after a full three-dose series. WHO recommends that all infants receive the first dose within 24 hours of birth, followed by two or more doses at spaced intervals.

What Are Gavi Countries?

Gavi supports lower-income and transitioning middle-income countries to strengthen immunisation systems and increase vaccine access. Countries that receive support are commonly referred to as “Gavi countries.”

Uzbekistan introduced universal hepatitis B vaccination in October 2001, supported by US$4.5 million in funding from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.

From 2001 to 2008, Uzbekistan provided the hepatitis B birth dose followed by two additional doses.

In 2009, the country upgraded to the pentavalent vaccine—offering protection against hepatitis B, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and Haemophilus influenzae type B—while still delivering a standalone birth dose. Gavi extended further funding of US$32 million for the next decade.

Vaccination coverage has remained impressively high—above 95% since 2002. However, until recently, the real-world impact of the programme on hepatitis B infection rates had not been comprehensively measured.

Proof of Progress In Uzbekistan’s Healthcare

In 2022, a team led by Dr Nino Khetsuriani from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), along with local researchers, conducted a nationwide survey.

They tested blood samples from 3,753 children in grades one to three and reviewed their immunisation records. Their findings, published in Vaccine, showed that just 0.2% of the children tested positive for HBsAg—proof of the vaccine’s long-term effectiveness.

With consistently high coverage, experts expect the burden of hepatitis B in Uzbekistan to decline further as vaccinated children grow into adulthood, replacing older, unvaccinated cohorts.

Uzbekistan graduated from Gavi’s financial support in 2022. Today, its national immunization programme is fully self-funded and regarded as one of the most efficient in the region.

“Uzbekistan stands as a model of excellence in immunization,” said Jan-Christopher Castilhos França, Gavi’s Senior Country Manager for Middle-Income Countries.

On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a lawsuit filed by Children’s Health Defense (CHD), an anti-vaccine group founded by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., now the Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Trump administration.

The group alleged that its First and Fifth Amendment rights were violated when Meta Platforms—parent company of Facebook and Instagram—restricted its content related to vaccine misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Without providing comment, the Supreme Court left in place a series of lower court rulings that dismissed CHD’s claims. These rulings found that Meta acted independently and could not be treated as a government actor bound by constitutional free speech protections.

Lawsuit Stemmed From Facebook’s 2022 Removal of CHD’s Page

The legal dispute centered around Facebook’s removal of CHD’s page in 2022, amid efforts to combat vaccine misinformation during the pandemic. CHD claimed Meta’s actions were a result of coordination with the federal government as part of the CDC’s “Vaccinate with Confidence” campaign—an initiative encouraging platforms to promote accurate health information.

The group’s lawsuit was filed under the First and Fifth Amendments and other laws, arguing that Meta effectively carried out government censorship by restricting CHD’s content. However, courts repeatedly found no substantial evidence of collusion between Meta and the federal government.

Lower Courts: Meta Is Not a State Actor

The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, among others, ruled that Meta, as a private company, is not a "state actor" and is therefore free to determine what content appears on its platforms. The court also observed that Meta and the federal government were not always aligned in their objectives or actions.

While the CDC encouraged accurate vaccine messaging, the 9th Circuit noted there was no direct government control or coercion over Meta’s decisions. This distinction was critical in rejecting CHD’s claim that Meta was acting as an agent of the state.

Dissent Raises Concern Over Platform Power

Despite the unanimous rulings, one appeals judge issued a dissent, suggesting that Meta may still warrant First Amendment scrutiny due to the sweeping influence it holds over public discourse. The judge argued that when a platform controls speech at such a vast scale, its role begins to resemble that of a government actor—especially when supported by government policy, even if not outright directed by it.

Part of a Broader Pattern

The rejection follows a similar 2024 Supreme Court ruling, in which justices said Louisiana, Missouri, and other Republican-led states lacked legal standing to sue the Biden administration over alleged censorship of conservative content on social media. These decisions reflect a cautious judicial stance on intervening in disputes over online content moderation, especially in the absence of clear evidence of government overreach.

A Continuing Free Speech Debate in the Digital Age

While Meta has prevailed legally, the case leaves unresolved broader questions about the relationship between government agencies and tech companies—and how far platforms can or should go in moderating content related to public health or politics.

As misinformation continues to be a major concern and social media remains central to public discourse, the debate over where free speech ends and platform responsibility begins is far from over.

Not too long ago, a second-year woman DNB resident doctor at Dr Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital, Rohini’s gynaecology department, was allegedly brutally attacked. This happened in broad daylight. The doctor was responsible for delivering a baby via caesarean section, and had informed that the baby had an Asphyxia score of three at birth, which meant the baby had a poor chance of survival. Despite seven days of ventilator support, the baby could not be saved. The consequence? The relatives allegedly attacked the doctor.

“Violence against doctors is not rare—it’s routine,” says Dr Dilip Bhanushali, National President, IMA. Rightly so, doctors have been facing violence at the hands of their patients and their families. “We’ve seen mobs arrive with kerosene, petrol, even swords, burning down hospitals. There was a law during COVID promising seven years imprisonment and non-bailable warrants for attacks on doctors, but it hasn’t been enforced. Most states still have weak three-year, bailable punishments,” points out Dr Bhanushali.

This is why this year’s theme for National Doctors’ Day is hard-hitting, but fits in perfectly with the ongoing scenarios.

National Doctor’s Day 2025 Theme

Behind The Mask: Who Heals The Healer?

Amid all the pressure and often walking on eggshells, how do doctors cope? This is something we have not thought about. This is why this year’s theme, Who Heals The Healer, is important. It compels us to think about the other side, the doctor’s side.

To answer how doctors cope, Dr Bhanushali says, “Doctors have been doing this for ages, they have been coping up, facing these hurdles. Still, they are doing their services. They sacrifice their lives.”

ALSO READ: Healers, But Human Too: The Quiet Burdens Our Doctors Carry

Despite it all, We Uphold Our Hippocratic Oath

He points out how doctors have become soft targets for everything, including the laws, which should ideally support them. Dr Bhanushali also points towards the RG Kar Medical College’s case where a female postgraduate trainee doctor was raped and murdered and her body was found in a seminar room on campus. Doctors across the nation went on a strike, demanding justice. “But we cannot go to the roads and do strikes every time. Despite it all, we uphold our Hippocratic oath,” points out Dr Bhanushali.

“Doctors continue to run medical camps, offer charity treatment—up to 30% of our practice is free. We don’t want anything bad to happen to our patients. Our profession is to heal.”

This year’s theme thus works as a reflection on the mental and emotional toll that doctors and other healthcare professionals face. The theme also asks the society to recognize doctors not just as medical professionals, but as humans, who, too, need support.

National Doctor’s Day 2025: History and Significance

Why is the day observed? The intent is to honor and acknowledge doctors’ and medical staff’s contributions to society. Furthermore, the theme asks for empathy from people.

The origin of Doctor’s Day came in 1991, when it was observed for the first time. The Government of India declared July 1 as National Doctors’ Day in honor of Dr Bidhan Chandra Roy, who has shown compassion and laid the foundation of same for many doctors to come. Dr Roy was born on July 1 1882, and died on the same day in 1962. He was also the personal physician of Mahatma Gandhi, and dedicated his life to people, which earned him the Bharat Ratna.

ALSO READ: Why Is It Important To Observe A Day For Doctors?

Why This Year’s National Doctor Day Theme Is So Important?

Not just the violence, points out Dr Bhanushali, but there are many other problems that doctors face. Mixopathy, he points out, is a “maniacal idea”. He says, “Training doctors for just one and a half years to perform 50 surgeries? That’s dangerous. Becoming a surgeon takes a decade of rigorous study. You can’t make a khichdi out of medical systems like Ayurveda, Allopathy, and Homoeopathy. Let each system stand on its own merit, not blur the lines for convenience."

He also pointed out that the government has only spent 1.9% of the country’s GDP on health, whereas “it should be at least 5%.”

“We produce over a lakh doctors annually. WHO recommends one doctor per 1,000 people. We’re at 1 per 850—but there’s no infrastructure, especially in rural areas. We are ready to serve there if the basics exist,” he notes. He further added that while schemes like Ayushman Bharat are promising, “the payments are delayed by months”. What he pointed out was that doctors are fighting a battle at almost every front, which is why it is important that people show compassion towards them.

The fight is not just for doctors and their rights alone; their fight is also for people. Dr Bhanushali pointed out that doctors have asked for HPV vaccination to be part of immunization programs and to be given for free to women aged 9 to 14. “Evidence clearly shows it helps prevent cervical cancer—the leading cancer among Indian women,” he points out.

The fight, too, is against the quacks, who have outnumbered qualified doctors. “Quackery is rampant. They prescribe high-end antibiotics and steroids irresponsibly. Telangana has made progress by identifying hundreds of them, but most get bail the same day. Without strict laws, this menace won’t stop,” he says.

In return for it all, what doctors ask for is support, which makes this year’s theme more important.

‘Don’t these issues frustrate the doctors?’ one might ask. While the answer to it is yes, they do. Dr Bhanushali, however, reminds doctors that “at the end of the day, we are here for the people.”

“Doctors keep going, even after everything. During COVID, so many doctors died. Still, we didn’t stop. And we won’t. My message to fellow doctors is: don’t lose your empathy and sympathy. Keep serving.”