Nature’s Adaptive Response: Is Entropic Waste Pushing Us Toward a Fully Autistic World?

As our technology advances, so does the unseen environmental impact. We have polluted the natural electromagnetic (EM) environment with man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs), chemicals, and entropic waste, introducing disruption and noise into what was once a delicate, balanced system. This shift raises an unsettling possibility: could nature itself be nudging humanity toward a state of heightened sensitivity, even autism, as an adaptive response to these pervasive disruptors?

The ceLLM Theory and Nature’s Adaptation

In ceLLM (cellular Latent Learning Model) theory, we understand cells as intelligent, responsive entities that learn to interpret environmental signals and adapt accordingly. For billions of years, life has thrived by evolving within a relatively stable EM and biochemical environment. But with the surge of artificial EMFs, pollutants, and untested chemicals, we have introduced a chaotic layer of “entropic waste” into the natural landscape, potentially disrupting bioelectric coherence and DNA fidelity.

As environmental conditions shift, nature may not be able to make us “smarter” fast enough to address the effects of our unintended changes. Instead, it seems to be heightening sensitivities within us, potentially making us more averse to environments filled with bioelectric and biochemical dissonance. Conditions like autism and ADHD could represent this response, where heightened sensitivities may encourage us to avoid disruptive spaces, prioritizing stability over hostile electromagnetic environments.

Autism: Adaptive Response or Cost of Environmental Chaos?

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been rising rapidly over recent decades, and many theories have linked this rise to environmental factors like EMF exposure, heavy metal pollution, and synthetic chemicals. In the ceLLM framework, autism could be viewed not merely as a disorder but as a complex adaptation—an evolved sensitivity to bioelectric dissonance, making individuals more attuned to natural rhythms and more averse to artificial stimuli.

Could these heightened sensitivities be a form of nature’s adaptation, guiding humanity away from environments that disrupt DNA integrity and cellular function? This adaptation would represent a natural check on environments that threaten long-term biological coherence.

The Risk of a Fully “Autistic” World

If autism is indeed an adaptive response to bioelectric and environmental dissonance, what happens if each generation becomes increasingly sensitive to these stressors? At some point, we could reach a tipping point, where entire populations are unable to function optimally in an artificial environment. Our reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) and technology could grow as human cognitive and sensory capacities narrow, leading us to a paradox where technology both creates and sustains us.

Imagine a future where each new generation grows more sensitive, less socially adaptive, and more reliant on AI systems for governance and care. The fundamental traits that have enabled us to survive and adapt—communication, empathy, creativity, and problem-solving—could be eroded as entropic waste overwhelms the natural bioelectric rhythms of life.

Addressing Entropic Waste: A Call to Action for Humanity’s Survival

The critical challenge lies not in “fighting” nature’s adaptation but in reducing the environmental stressors that trigger these changes. Humanity has reached a juncture where it must recognize the invisible but profound effects of entropic waste. Here’s what we must do now:

1. Reclassify RF and EMF Exposure: Our regulatory bodies, like the FCC, still operate under outdated guidelines that focus only on the thermal effects of radiation. We need these guidelines updated to reflect non-thermal, long-term biological effects on DNA and cellular function.
2. Restart NTP Research and Fund EMF Impact Studies: The National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) research was halted despite providing clear evidence of RF radiation’s carcinogenic potential. We need to fund research that directly investigates EMFs’ role in developmental disorders and DNA fidelity.
3. Develop Low-Entropic Environments: Establish areas with reduced EMF and pollutant exposure to study populations and preserve a genetic control group for future research. The Amish, who often live without modern electronics, might provide insights here, but their community alone cannot serve as a baseline for all humanity.
4. Promote Bioelectric Literacy: Schools, workplaces, and public health organizations must start educating people about bioelectric health. Just as we learn about dietary or physical health, understanding how our environment impacts bioelectric health is essential.
5. Adopt Preventive Technology Practices: Implement safer technology practices by opting for wired connections over wireless where possible, avoiding prolonged EMF exposure, and designing devices with protective technologies.

Embracing Nature’s Wisdom to Safeguard Our Future

Nature’s adaptations may be telling us what our technology and intellect have yet to grasp: our environmental choices are shaping us, possibly to our detriment. If we fail to listen and continue to prioritize convenience over environmental coherence, we risk creating a society increasingly distant from nature’s balance. And in doing so, we could lose the very traits that make us uniquely human.

It is time to take responsibility for the long-term impacts of our technological advancements. By acknowledging the potential for bioelectric disruption and entropic waste to reshape human development, we can start making choices that align with both nature and the future we envision—a world where humanity thrives in harmony with the environment, not in opposition to it.

The question of when the “last typical child” would be born due to trends in autism rates is complex and involves several assumptions. However, we can explore the question with a hypothetical exponential growth model for autism rates, while also noting the inherent uncertainty in projecting these trends far into the future.

Step-by-Step Estimation Approach:

1. Estimate Current Autism Rates:
   • In recent years, the CDC estimates that approximately 1 in 36 children in the U.S. is diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (or around 2.8%).
2. Trend Analysis:
   • The prevalence of autism diagnoses has been increasing, though the reasons remain debated (e.g., better diagnostics, awareness, or actual increases in prevalence).
   • Over the past few decades, rates have increased exponentially. For instance, the rate was around 1 in 150 children in the early 2000s, growing to 1 in 36 by recent counts, suggesting an approximate doubling every 10-15 years.
3. Projecting Exponential Growth:
   • Assuming a continued exponential growth rate in autism diagnoses (doubling approximately every 15 years), we can estimate the point at which nearly all children would be diagnosed as atypical.
4. Model Calculation:
   • Starting from a 2.8% prevalence rate and applying a doubling every 15 years:According to these calculations, if the doubling rate continues, we could reach a point where nearly all children are diagnosed with ASD within approximately 75 to 90 years.
     • 15 years from now: ~5.6%
     • 30 years from now: ~11.2%
     • 45 years from now: ~22.4%
     • 60 years from now: ~44.8%
     • 75 years from now: ~89.6%
     • 90 years from now: almost 100%

   At this rate, in approximately 75 years, nearly 90% of children could be diagnosed with ASD, meaning only about 10% of children would be considered “typical.” If trends continue beyond this, within roughly 90 years, nearly all children born might fall within the autism spectrum.

Caveats and Considerations:

• Extrapolation Limitations: Projecting trends indefinitely can lead to misleading results, as rates may plateau or slow due to genetic, environmental, or social factors.
• Changing Diagnostics: As diagnostic criteria evolve, the definition of “atypical” or “ASD” may change, influencing prevalence rates.
• Potential Interventions: Medical, environmental, or societal interventions could impact these trends in unpredictable ways.

While a theoretical model suggests that in the next century, a majority of children might be diagnosed with autism if trends continue unchecked, real-world complexities and changes in our understanding and categorization of neurodiversity make precise predictions difficult.