Orangey and The Brainworm Strike Again

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, LinkSoul60 said:

There was probably people drinking bleach during covid too. Fools everywhere...

Well I don't know about bleach but  Kool-aid certainly

[Venandi]

12 hours ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Why.... because like I replied 'may' and 'more research' is not definitive.

I would say that's a given but since I don't get some of the reactions here I'l simply pose a question:

Trump bluster aside, a simple google search will propose a possible (non definitive) link between the consumption of Acetaminophen and the possibility of neurodevelopment issues during pregnancy. There is no ban, no restrictions and everyone agrees that more research is required to confirm or deny the existence of a causal relationship.

So:

1. Knowing that, should the administration have said nothing about it until definitive proof (one way or another) was established even though that process could take years? and;

2. Had they done that and a link was definitively proven after 2 years of research, would you then fault them for sitting on the information and not giving expectant mothers the option to exercise their own discretion?

As an aside, fools making videos of themselves gobbling up Tylenol by the handful and Herbs assertion that...:

"The bozo uses Goebbel's headquarters as a source of his 'facts'. Amazing people so damn gullible can never learn."

... is the domain of buffoons with advanced TDS, it's well worthy of being ignored by sensible people looking to make sensible determinations for themselves and their own situation. It's reminiscent of covid madness and Ivermectin Derangement Syndrome where no rational discussion of the biology/science behind it or anything close to tolerating personal threat assessments was in the cards.. 

For the record, my answers are:

1. Hell NO

2. Hell yes... Herb would be personally leading the charge and suggesting that Trump deliberately conducted medical experiments on pregnant women (sorry Herb that would be "pregnant people" for you) whilst connecting those dots directly back to Hitler.

Clearly a manufactured pic but note the "high vis" jacket.

It should be mandatory for confirmed lunatics with advanced TDS before allowing them to be out in public unescorted. 

Got yours yet Herb?

Edited September 24, 2025 by Venandi

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, Venandi said:

I would say that's a given but since I don't get some of the reactions here I'l simply pose a question:

Trump bluster aside, a simple google search will propose a possible (non definitive) link between the consumption of Acetaminophen and the possibility of neurodevelopment issues during pregnancy. There is no ban, no restrictions and everyone agrees that more research is required to confirm or deny the existence of a causal relationship.

So:

1. Knowing that, should the administration have said nothing about it until definitive proof (one way or another) was established even though that process could take years? and;

2. Had they done that and a link was definitively proven after 2 years of research, would you then fault them for sitting on the information and not giving expectant mothers the option to exercise their own discretion?

As an aside, fools making videos of themselves gobbling up Tylenol by the handful and Herbs assertion that...:

"The bozo uses Goebbel's headquarters as a source of his 'facts'. Amazing people so damn gullible can never learn."

... is the domain of buffoons with advanced TDS, it's well worthy of being ignored by sensible people looking to make sensible determinations for themselves and their own situation. It's reminiscent of covid madness and Ivermectin Derangement Syndrome where no rational discussion of the biology/science behind it or anything close to tolerating personal threat assessments was in the cards.. 

For the record, my answers are:

1. Hell NO

2. Hell yes... Herb would be personally leading the charge and suggesting that Trump deliberately conducted medical experiments on pregnant women (sorry Herb that would be "pregnant people" for you) whilst connecting those dots directly back to Hitler.

Clearly a manufactured pic but note the "high vis" jacket.

It should be mandatory for confirmed lunatics with advanced TDS before allowing them to be out in public unescorted. 

Got yours yet Herb?

No political bias at all....but the first thing I'd say is that Trump or any other politician shouldn't delve into subjects of this importance without conclusive facts. This was an RFKjr thing from the beginning and despite medical community disagreement they charged ahead for whatever the reason....ego, news cycle, who knows.

1. No, they shouldn't have come out with this. I'm not even remotely close to medicine research educated but I'd take more assurance in comments from people who's careers have been devoted to this;  “Suggestions that acetaminophen use in pregnancy causes autism are not only highly concerning to clinicians but also irresponsible when considering the harmful and confusing message they send to pregnant patients, including those who may need to rely on this beneficial medicine during pregnancy,” a statement from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said.  “If you don’t take Tylenol when you have a fever, especially in the first trimester, we know that can be detrimental to the fetus,” Gyamfi-Bannerman said.  

2. That's a hypothetical so I can't answer it.  If we had the luxury of hindsight the obvious answer would be 'yes, they were right for doing this'.  If hindsight shows otherwise then obviously nothing at all should have been said by politicians. It's a hypothetical though, just like 'may' and 'needs more research' means nothing is conclusive.

I don't remember any Tylenol talk or my wife even needing to take it when she was pregnant for our children...?  My daughter is pregnant right now though and if she had a fever and asked my advice of what to do (which she's not going to) then I'd say listen to what medical experts say, not a politician.  For me and I'd hope the majority of people, that's only common sense.

Who knows with the vid...  I'm sure lots of people are embellishing for their 30 seconds of fame but there's also a lot of very uneducated and gullible people out there who hang on the words of a president.  Let medical experts talk about medicine and politicians talk about politics.

[paxamericana]

Dr Orange man is right.

[SpankyMcFarland]

16 hours ago, CdnFox said:

There's nothing woke about it it's just practical.

You haven't presented any facts that are relevant, your opinion is all you presented. Nothing you've presented actually refutes what they found, all it says is someone looked at it in a different way and didn't find anything.  That doesn't make them wrong, so how is it relevant?

In your own phrases betray you. If there's a major study that proves that it's a problem then you "MIGHT" Change your mind. The issue is you don't want to change your mind so the evidence has to be absolutely overwhelming for you to even consider it

And I noticed you couldn't answer the question I asked about what you would say to the mother whose children suffered unnecessarily if it does turn out to be true.

It's wrong not to take appropriate action where you can just because you don't like trump

How do you address the obvious problem in any retrospective study that the two groups of women - the women who take Tylenol and the women who don’t - may not be the same in their likelihood of having autistic children even before they take the drug? Sibling studies are one way of reducing this bias. And when these groups are examined in one of the biggest and best studies ever conducted, the Tylenol effect disappears. There is also no dose-response relationship. Do you have any other suggestions for managing this potential bias? 

Edited September 24, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

  Do you have any other suggestions for managing this potential bias? 

Double blind testing with placebo and with randomly selected subjects.

 

I looked at the White House release though and it seems to have only cited studies that found a correlation, which is not the same thing. Who knows..

[SpankyMcFarland]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Double blind testing with placebo and with randomly selected subjects.

 

I looked at the White House release though and it seems to have only cited studies that found a correlation, which is not the same thing. Who knows..

Of course, that type of gold standard study would be morally, ethically and legally impossible in this case. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Senator and doctor Bill Cassidy is up for re-election next year, very much wants to avoid any dispute with Trump and yet has come out against the Tylenol claims:

Quote

 

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a gastroenterologist who chairs the Senate’s health committee, is challenging President Donald Trump’s announcement baselessly linking Tylenol use during pregnancy to autism and calling on the Health and Human Services Department to release any evidence it has on the subject.

 

 

 

Quote

“The preponderance of evidence shows that this is not the case,” Cassidy wrote. “The concern is that women will be left with no options to manage pain in pregnancy. We must be compassionate to this problem.”

He added that HHS, helmed by vocal health conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy Jr., “should release the new data that it has to support this claim.”

 

Quote

“There is an article out of Sweden ― two million people followed ― and what they did is they looked at someone who had autism and they compared them to a sibling who did not have autism, and they found no association, effectively, between taking Tylenol or not,” Cassidy pointed out, calling it the “highest quality” and “best controlled” study on the subject.

The findings Trump was referencing Monday appeared to be from “a study which found an association,” he said. “Now that’s the key thing: an association. That doesn’t mean it causes it; it just means that it’s associated.”

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bill-cassidy-trump-tylenol-autism_n_68d2d9f7e4b06a8b846e6a6c

 

 

 

[Legato]

4 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Senator and doctor Bill Cassidy is up for re-election next year, very much wants to avoid any dispute with Trump and yet has come out against the Tylenol claims:

 

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bill-cassidy-trump-tylenol-autism_n_68d2d9f7e4b06a8b846e6a6c

 

 

 

You keep posting un proven articles and yet do not have an explanation which addresses the rise in autism.

[SpankyMcFarland]

15 minutes ago, Legato said:

You keep posting un proven articles and yet do not have an explanation which addresses the rise in autism.

They’re not unproven articles for crying out loud. They are the best articles on the subject from brilliant medical researchers in top medical journals. Why does Senator Bill Cassidy (R) agree with me? 

Again, this is the Swedish article we are talking about.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2817406

That’s the Journal of the American Medical Association. 

This matter is not, and should not be, a political football. Fair play to Cassidy for weighing in with his expert opinion as a physician and risking his career as a senator. 

 

Edited September 24, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[Legato]

3 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

They’re not unproven articles for crying out loud. They are the best articles on the subject from brilliant medical researchers in top medical journals. Why does Senator Bill Cassidy (R) agree with me? 

Again, this is the Swedish article we are talking about.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2817406

 

Unproven, just like thalidomide. Still no answer for the rise in autism.

[SpankyMcFarland]

9 minutes ago, Legato said:

Unproven, just like thalidomide. Still no answer for the rise in autism.

An utterly ridiculous comparison. If Tylenol helps cause autism it is just one factor in a complex disease. A majority of doctors believe that this is not the case. 

One clear factor in the rise of autism is far greater awareness of the condition among families and health care workers. It just wasn’t diagnosed that much in obviously autistic people way back when. 
 

 

Edited September 24, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[Legato]

5 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

An utterly ridiculous comparison. If Tylenol is associated with autism it is just one factor in a complex disease. 

One clear factor in the rise of autism is far greater awareness of the condition among families and health care workers. It just wasn’t diagnosed that much in obviously autistic people way back when. 
 

 

Oh yes every medical study ever produced has been 100% correct. Give me a break.

Metical studies said thalidomide was safe, that would be the ridiculous part.

I there is a correlation that acetaminophen could be having an effect don't you think that erring on the side of caution would be the wise thing to do.

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Just now, Legato said:

Oh yes every medical study ever produced has been 100% correct. Give me a break.

Science is always uncertain. Every claim made is inherently falsifiable and vulnerable to correction. It wouldn’t be science otherwise. All that can be offered is the best knowledge at the moment and journals like JAMA do their damnedest to ensure they are getting the best research papers possible. 

 

Just now, Legato said:

Metical studies said thalidomide was safe, that would be the ridiculous part.

In fairness, people began to see problem there once the kids were born. It wasn’t a subtle matter like this is. 

 

Just now, Legato said:

I there is a correlation that acetaminophen could be having an effect don't you think that erring on the side of caution would be the wise thing to do.

There is a small positive correlation that still lacks the tell-tale signs of causality, as illustrated in the Swedish study. ‘Erring on the side of caution’ would bring its own risks here. 

Why do you think most doctors agree with me on this subject? Are they reckless psychopaths who don’t care about the welfare of their patients? 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

How do you address the obvious problem in any retrospective study that the two groups of women - the women who take Tylenol and the women who don’t - may not be the same in their likelihood of having autistic children even before they take the drug? Sibling studies are one way of reducing this bias. And when these groups are examined in one of the biggest and best studies ever conducted, the Tylenol effect disappears. There is also no dose-response relationship. Do you have any other suggestions for managing this potential bias? 

It would be just as reasonble to say that tylenol affects different women differently and in some raises the problem and in others it doesn't, and bological twins would mask that.  

Wasn't that hard was it.  If the effect is different based on different biology then sibling studies won't show a difference. 

And it may not be tylenol directly causing the issue, it may be how it interacts with something else and siblings may be more likely to be exposed or not exposed to the same external variable.  In other words there could be a confounding variable you don't know about and a sibling test would mask it. 

Still wasn't hard   

Here's what we DO know.  A research paper that's been reviewed suggests that there IS a potential link and this is concerning.  Therefore a REASONABLE AND SANE person would say until additional research is done, minimizing the use of tylenol in these cases as much as possible is the wise and prudent thing to do. 

A person who's blinded by politics would say "i don't want to do something trump says unless theres ABSOLUTE PROOF and a note signed by god and then i'll maybe think about it". 

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Just now, CdnFox said:

It would be just as reasonble to say that tylenol affects different women differently and in some raises the problem and in others it doesn't, and bological twins would mask that.  

Wasn't that hard was it.  If the effect is different based on different biology then sibling studies won't show a difference. 

And it may not be tylenol directly causing the issue, it may be how it interacts with something else and siblings may be more likely to be exposed or not exposed to the same external variable.  In other words there could be a confounding variable you don't know about and a sibling test would mask it. 

Still wasn't hard   

Here's what we DO know.  A research paper that's been reviewed suggests that there IS a potential link and this is concerning.  Therefore a REASONABLE AND SANE person would say until additional research is done, minimizing the use of tylenol in these cases as much as possible is the wise and prudent thing to do. 

A person who's blinded by politics would say "i don't want to do something trump says unless theres ABSOLUTE PROOF and a note signed by god and then i'll maybe think about it". 

 

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

[SpankyMcFarland]

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. 

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Science is always uncertain. Every claim made is inherently falsifiable and vulnerable to correction. It wouldn’t be science otherwise. All that can be offered is the best knowledge at the moment and journals like JAMA do their damnedest to ensure they are getting the best research papers possible. 

 

In fairness, people began to see problem there once the kids were born. It wasn’t a subtle matter like this is. 

 

There is a small positive correlation that still lacks the tell-tale signs of causality, as illustrated in the Swedish study. ‘Erring on the side of caution’ would bring its own risks here. 

Why do you think most doctors agree with me on this subject? Are they reckless psychopaths who don’t care about the welfare of their patients? 

You never answered this, what would you say to the women who listened to you and ate all the tylenol they wanted and it was later found that it actually did have an impact and they have autistic children.

Will you offer compensation out of your pocket? Will you help them raising the child? I know first hand a little about that, it's not very fun a lot of the time. 

How would you explain that you thought the advice 'minimize tylenol use' was just too radical given there was only SOME evidence it may be causing a problem and you just didn't want to give trump any 'victories'. 

[CdnFox]

50 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

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

Sorry, are you asking if a politician is political? 

I'm going to go with yes   Dumb question.  

As to whether he does or doesn't like trump, or whether perhaps some of his constituents are complaining about trump and he wants to distance himself, i don't know.  But yes, politicians are usually motivated by politics. 

Do you claim that the authors of the studies that found a possible causal link are all trump supporters and maga ?

Did you have anything else equally banal and trite to add or did you get that out of your system now?

 

[Legato]

45 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

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. 

So are you saying there has been no increase in autism?

[CdnFox]

53 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

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

Oh and i notice you couldn't address even one of my points.  You asked specifically about how the study results could be different with twins, I gave you two excellent reasons. 

Yet suddenly you switched topics. 

Tell me again how this is 'all about reason and logic' for you

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, Legato said:

So are you saying there has been no increase in autism?

Actually , in the complete interest of fairness, it's really hard to say. They changed the diagnosis definition a little while back. In the older diagnosis days  you had to be severely autistic with extreme symptoms to be 'diagnosed' as autistic.  Eventually they realized it was a spectrum and now even people who are 'mildly' on the spectrum are diagnosed that way even if they're highly functional.  And of course there's a transition as docs get used to the new rules. 

That does NOT mean there isn't an increase, there very well can be and it feels like there is, but i'm just saying the numbers of 'diagnosed cases' may not grant a crystal clear picture and it actually is a little hard to track. 

There definitely is some indication it's increasing. 

IN canada for example in 2019  1 in 50 kids had it, or about 2 percent.   Prior to that it was 1 in 66 in 2015 and even better before that.  So even after the change in diagnostic techiques there is some reason to believe the prevelance is increasing, especially in males. 

Autism spectrum disorder: Highlights from the 2019 Canadian health survey on children and youth - Canada.ca

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, paxamericana said:

Dr Orange man is right.

Or it MAY NOT. Depends ON WHO?

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, Legato said:

You keep posting un proven articles and yet do not have an explanation which addresses the rise in autism.

Doctors have already TOLD US: additional knowledge about the autism SPECTRUM has expanded what qualifies.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Legato said:

So are you saying there has been no increase in autism?

There has been an increase in it's DIAGNOSIS.