SpankyMcFarland

All these contradictory statements erode American credibility.

I know they are in trouble and they that they know a lot more about this than I do but being a poorer copy doesn't seem the way to go to me. And I’m not sceptical that the athletes are better down south, merely that such a fact changes the spectacle that much given that we are watching a different game. Should I stop watching rugby because the athletes are in some ways better in the NFL? They are different games. I think the NFL is more slickly produced. It’s like the Premiership in soccer compared to the Spanish or Italian leagues. We like the production values, the razzmatazz they bring down there. The term NHL is simply wrong. It’s even more misleading than World Series. Debates for another day.

That view is not compatible with modern liberal democracy and national self-determination. It’s at least a hundred years out of date. If your country embarks on such a path your own freedoms will suffer.

I presume they have good reasons for doing this but I can’t really see why. As a foreigner I never really got into the CFL, preferring rugby, soccer and the NFL, but I attended a few Stampeders games in Calgary and found the differences with the US version interesting. I’m sceptical of the ‘best athletes’ argument. The US just dominates our culture. I watch a load of US TV and American football comes with that for good or ill. BTW why did they never change the name NHL in hockey? It’s not a national league. I feel it’s like Canada was ignored there which is increasingly the case in the way they expanded the teams.

Pedantry is not a bad idea in this debate. I prefer the term association to link just so we know we’re not necessarily taking about a cause here. I’m afraid there is no good evidence yet that Tylenol increases the likelihood of autism. Again, I refer you to the recent statement from the president of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology which is fairly explicit. Bear in mind that many of the alternatives to Tylenol come with their own risks.

The bottom line is that most doctors responsible for actually treating patients have not changed their views on this matter just because Trump made some ill-advised statements. Such views are reflected in the statements of their professional associations and represent the best advice for the public.

Here is another milestone in xenotransplantation. Tim Andrews has just survived six months with a pig kidney. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02851-w

I posted a recent statement from the president of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology above. It’s fairly clear. Can you produce a link supporting your opinion from a similarly authoritative source, eg a college of relevant specialists or a national medical association in North America or Western Europe?

Every person is different, yes, so what good studies are trying to do is make sure that the difference seen in the drug group is due to the drug and not something else. Because we can’t randomize in this setting other ways have to be found to reduce the background variation. Looking at siblings is a great way to do that.

The evidence is what it is. We can’t see beyond it and take action on how we think it might turn out - that’s black magic not science. The consensus among the experts right now is that all we have here is a statistical correlation.

Gotta watch them NSAIDS b’y, especially after 20 weeks. Don’t be advising women to take them. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-recommends-avoiding-use-nsaids-pregnancy-20-weeks-or-later-because-they-can-result-low-amniotic Pregnancy is tricky. Take a look at the literature of associations that have been found over the years.

This is the problem when politics enters a medical debate - moderation becomes a hard thing to find. Needless to say, acetaminophen can be very dangerous if taken in excess.

There is evidence of an association.

Here are more reasons for concern about that much-quoted Harvard study: And this is an interesting detail: You’d expect the head of a prestigious academic department, actually a veritable school of public health, to be trusted to speak for themselves, especially just after providing such crucial evidence to the government. https://www.statnews.com/2025/09/23/researcher-behind-trump-tylenol-autism-expert-testimony-tossed/

He’s obviously a skilled politician. I don’t agree with his plans to ban speed cameras, though. That sounds like a populist move.

Again, I don’t know whether the condition described as ASD is increasing in frequency in the population but I do know that far greater efforts are being made to diagnose it these days. Did you read the quotes I just pasted from the article you quoted?

That article isn’t good enough for me. It’s too indiscriminate in its selection criteria and includes some badly designed studies in the data set. I also note that the authors all seem to be in public health or related fields. A few paediatricians and obstetricians on the paper would be reassuring. Here is a better one of a similar type that comes to very different conclusions: https://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/abstract/2025/02000/acetaminophen_in_pregnancy_and_attention_deficit.8.aspx The best study I’ve seen is the Swedish one from JAMA - 25 years of data on nearly 2.5 million children, nearly every single birth in the country over the time period. It is a joy to behold. Not too many researchers in the world could acquire such a large and solid set of data.

Here is a recent statement from the president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: https://www.acog.org/news/news-releases/2025/09/acog-affirms-safety-benefits-acetaminophen-pregnancy

Who are the globalists exactly?

From the article you quote: In my own community, we saw more cases diagnosed when a specialist arrived who had expertise in diagnosing the disorder. In the US paediatricians are making more diagnoses in girls and non-white children than they used to as well. To summarize, we have seen a huge rise in diagnosis of the condition. Much of this is down to increased awareness of it and changed criteria to diagnose it. Is there also a fundamental rise in autism itself? The jury is still out on that.

Nobody is encouraging pregnant women to take drugs unnecessarily. All drugs have side effects and we can assume many of them are not known.

Awareness of ASD has increased considerably among families and physicians in the last twenty years. The arrival of paediatricians with an interest in the disorder can lead to increased rates of diagnosis in a region.

I’m saying I don’t know. It can be a subtle diagnosis at the edge of spectrum. There’s no question many of those people would not have been classified as autistic thirty years ago. If you have specialists with expertise in diagnosing a disorder, your rates will generally rise.

A lot of people here are up in years. Surely you remember when people were considered ‘a little odd’ or ‘a loner’ without any further characterization? There has been a huge cultural change in the awareness of autism spectrum disorder that must account for much of the spike in cases.

Is Senator (and doctor) Bill Cassidy (R) blinded by politics or Trump hatred?