Suramin & Autism: Promising early signal — but why aren’t we funding bigger trials? A 2017 study by Dr. Robert Naviaux tested the century-old drug Suramin (originally for African sleeping sickness) in a small group of children with autism. In that tiny randomized trial, a single low-dose IV infusion was associated with improvements in core symptoms — language, social interaction, eye contact, and repetitive behaviors — in the treatment group. These changes were not seen with placebo. The researchers tied it to the “Cell Danger Response” hypothesis. Should we be investing more aggressively in follow-up research? Absolutely — if the science holds up, this could be worth exploring properly. Repurposing existing drugs is often cheaper and faster than developing brand-new ones, yet it frequently gets underfunded. Is the slow progress just normal bureaucracy and funding priorities… or is something else getting in the way? What do you think — should governments, foundations, or private donors be stepping up for bigger Suramin trials?