I don’t think it’s falsifiable until there are autism diagnostics that aren’t behavioral. Right now, they’re 100% behavioral, which that any theory that tries to cluster autism symptoms is hopelessly tainted by a recursive definition -> diagnosis -> definition cycle.

If intervention x results in y behavior changing in z% of the population (or not), would that count? I think it would.

Just because it doesn’t describe 100% of situations or work 100% of the time doesn’t mean it couldn’t be shown to produce useful predictions and work or not.

And yes, that isn’t particle physics type falsifiable, but it is medical treatment falsifiable. Kinda. Newtons theory never predicted Mercury’s behavior, but was still super useful eh?