Orangey and The Brainworm Strike Again

[Legato]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

What sort of evidence would you like? Have you read the Swedish study? As Wes Streeting says, pay no attention to him or any other politician - this isn’t their area of expertise to put it mildly. 
 

What don’t you understand? 

Have you read the Harvard and Mt. Sinai studies?

If Obama had come out with a similar statement you would be shouting Tylenol's bad from the rooftops

There is not a single over the counter medication that does not have side effects, bear that in mind.

[Hodad]

6 hours ago, Venandi said:

I think that's the point (or it's my point).

Personally, I hadn't heard about this association and wouldn't have thought to go looking because it's generally assumed to be innocuous during pregnancy. I suppose it's reasonable to assume that no medication is truly innocuous during pregnancy, but in the absence of grabbing the bull by the horns and doing a deliberate search, most women would simply take Tylenol without a second thought after being told it's OK to use duing pregnancy.

Realistically, I think that's how most women look at it.

It's that simple really and I think most women actually want to know... my own small, anecdotal and totally useless survey suggests that the ladies I know didn't know. 

Put another way, if the medical community is so familiar with it I think that their patients should be too. I don't see why that's a problem... women shouldn't have to do a bunch of research and read studies. On the other hand, knowing that something isn't recommended for routine use doesn't mean it shouldn't be used as required and when required.

I don't unstrap after takeoff and insist you do the landing... Doctors shouldn't assume that women will read the studies either.

 

Nobody expects women to read the latest medical journals and interpret the studies. And surely nobody expects our dim POTUS to read medical studies--and indeed, clearly, he'd never read the word "acetaminophen" before deciding to offer medical advice on it's usage.

Women get that guidance from their doctors. It's standard guidance in prenatal care--inclusive of proper detail and nuance. 

Go to your medicine cabinet, take out a bottle, look at the dosage and it will tell you right there to talk to your doctor if pregnant. 

Great damn advice. Unlike Trump's rambling, bumbling adventure into heterodox TV medicine. It's nuts. Never should have happened.

Edited September 27, 2025 by Hodad

[SpankyMcFarland]

4 hours ago, Venandi said:

I really have little in the way of argument with that, I'm simply suggesting that if most women knew about a possible link between Tylenol and autism/ADHD they (perhaps) would not have used it routinely for minor pain relief thinking it was totally innocuous. 

Maybe it is... maybe it isn't, the point is most (or some) might play it safe and suck up a bit of minor discomfort had they been aware. Taking it for a fever isn't in the same file folder as daily consumption for minor back aches. 

I'm not going to continue around the buoy on this but I'd suggest that most women don't do in-depth research on such things and don't read studies posted online as a matter of course. The fact this is a topic of conversation now seems to bear that out.  

There is no good evidence of a causal link between Tylenol and autism. That’s the current medical consensus. There is an association in some papers. There is also an association  between violent crime rates and ice cream consumption (in summer) but nobody imagines a cause and effect there. 

Whatever about minor aches and pains, fever in pregnancy poses a problem for physicians in the absence of Tylenol. Many of the alternative drugs carry genuine, well documented risks, as does not treating it as well.

Members of the public should not be expected to read and understand the medical literature on any matter. That’s what the experts are there for. If everybody on the medical and governmental side behaves as they should the system works well to provide patients with the best available evidence. 

Edited September 27, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

4 hours ago, Legato said:

Have you read the Harvard and Mt. Sinai studies?

If Obama had come out with a similar statement you would be shouting Tylenol's bad from the rooftops

There is not a single over the counter medication that does not have side effects, bear that in mind.

Will you stop with the political nonsense and try and evaluate the data? I have already pointed out multiple flaws with the Harvard study and even with one of the authors in this thread. He wasn’t even allowed to answer questions by his university on the paper recently and was rebuked by a judge for his testimony in a related case. By contrast, look at the Swedish study - fantastic record keeping on 2.5 million births from a unitary health system over a 25 year period. No American study on this subject compares remotely with that. 

Edited September 27, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

17 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

So now that you’ve removed Tylenol from the list what would you recommend to treat fever in pregnancy? 

Depends on the time in the pregnancy.  Several optipns exist earlier on, and i believe children's aspirin is recommended through out. 

However, you're being dishonest again. And that's pretty obvious. The issue wasn't to "Take tylenol off the list". That is a lie on your part and a pretty obvious one.  The recommendation is to minimize and avoid it's use where possible. 

so if for a specific woman there's no better choice at that time of her pregnancy then fine, use it. Just keep its' use as minimal as possilbe. 

And you lied about that because you knew you were in the wrong. 

My argument doesn't require me to lie about anything in order for it to stand up. You feel the need to resort to lies and obvious ones to desperately try and shore up your argument. Pretty obvious which one of us is on the right side of this

[SpankyMcFarland]

7 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Depends on the time in the pregnancy.  Several optipns exist earlier on, and i believe children's aspirin is recommended through out. 

However, you're being dishonest again. And that's pretty obvious. The issue wasn't to "Take tylenol off the list". That is a lie on your part and a pretty obvious one.  The recommendation is to minimize and avoid it's use where possible. 

so if for a specific woman there's no better choice at that time of her pregnancy then fine, use it. Just keep its' use as minimal as possilbe. 

And you lied about that because you knew you were in the wrong. 

My argument doesn't require me to lie about anything in order for it to stand up. You feel the need to resort to lies and obvious ones to desperately try and shore up your argument. Pretty obvious which one of us is on the right side of this

You’re a little evasive there. What dose of aspirin would you advise women to take for fever? 

Edited September 27, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

What did I lie about?

I was very clear about that. Since the very first post it's been about women avoiding Tylenol if they can not about taking it off the table. Yet you claimed that it was about taking it off the table. That was a lie and you knew it

Quote

I am not trying ‘desperately’ to do anything,

Everyone can see that you are. It's absolutely obvious to anybody who's over the age of six.

Quote

merely to present the facts as I understand them. Grow up.  

You knew the facts were that they weren't saying never use Tylenol. They were saying minimize its use as much as possible. So again you lie to try and cover up your previous lie.

Then you tell other people to grow up. 🙄🙄🙄

I can make my points without lying. Not only do you have to lie to make your points, but then you have to lie about lying.

Nobody took Tylenol off the table. It is however wise and prudent to say that if there's evidence that a thing may not be safe to use that you should minimize its use as much as possible until evidence proves the situation one way or another.

I'm sorry that bothers you so much. But your hatred of trump is getting in the way of your common sense

[SpankyMcFarland]

4 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I was very clear about that. Since the very first post it's been about women avoiding Tylenol if they can not about taking it off the table. Yet you claimed that it was about taking it off the table. That was a lie and you knew it

Everyone can see that you are. It's absolutely obvious to anybody who's over the age of six.

You knew the facts were that they weren't saying never use Tylenol. They were saying minimize its use as much as possible. So again you lie to try and cover up your previous lie.

Then you tell other people to grow up. 🙄🙄🙄

I can make my points without lying. Not only do you have to lie to make your points, but then you have to lie about lying.

Nobody took Tylenol off the table. It is however wise and prudent to say that if there's evidence that a thing may not be safe to use that you should minimize its use as much as possible until evidence proves the situation one way or another.

I'm sorry that bothers you so much. But your hatred of trump is getting in the way of your common sense

Try and leave your wretched politics out of this matter. You’ve spent pages denouncing Tylenol as a drug in pregnancy. Fine. What are your alternatives exactly? Please list the possible dangers of each drug as well so that women who will have to use these know what they are getting themselves into. Start with aspirin. 

Edited September 27, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Try and leave your wretched politics out of this matter.

Unfortunately it's not possible, you're wretched politics keep getting in the way.

Quote

You’ve spent pages denouncing Tylenol as a drug in pregnancy. Fine.

Actually what I've spent pages doing is making a very simple statement. And that statement is that there is evidence that there may be a problem with pregnant women taking Tylenol and therefore the logical and reasonable thing to do is minimize its use as much as possible.

And that's a statement you haven't actually been able to refute or even come back with any kind of logical argument as to why it's not true.

Quote

What are your alternatives exactly?

To use it as little as possible. 

And you haven't come up with a single solitary word as to why that's not a good idea.  All you say is "trump wrong eat tylenol". 

 

So let's get down to it. Explain to me why the statement "there is evidence that there may be a problem with pregnant women taking Tylenol and therefore the logical and reasonable thing to do is minimize its use as much as possible." is wrong. 

Spell that out for me. You spent pages arguing that it's wrong without actually addressing it, so enough of your bullshit. Either admit you were wrong the entire time and you've only been defending this position for political reasons

[SpankyMcFarland]

30 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Unfortunately it's not possible, you're wretched politics keep getting in the way.

Actually what I've spent pages doing is making a very simple statement. And that statement is that there is evidence that there may be a problem with pregnant women taking Tylenol and therefore the logical and reasonable thing to do is minimize its use as much as possible.

And that's a statement you haven't actually been able to refute or even come back with any kind of logical argument as to why it's not true.

To use it as little as possible. 

And you haven't come up with a single solitary word as to why that's not a good idea.  All you say is "trump wrong eat tylenol". 
 

Trump is wrong. Of course, I never said anybody should be ‘eating Tylenol’. I actually pointed out in a post that political arguments can lead to such extremism. 
 

 

 

30 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

 

So let's get down to it. Explain to me why the statement "there is evidence that there may be a problem with pregnant women taking Tylenol and therefore the logical and reasonable thing to do is minimize its use as much as possible." is wrong. 

Spell that out for me. You spent pages arguing that it's wrong without actually addressing it, so enough of your bullshit. Either admit you were wrong the entire time and you've only been defending this position for political reasons

There is no good evidence of that. Talk to the local experts in your province if you don’t believe me. Contact the dept of OBGYN in UBC and ask the head of dept if they agree that Tylenol causes autism. Contact anybody in authority in health care. 

Of course, as if I need to say this, I do not encourage the use of any medicine in pregnancy beyond the minimum needed. 

You’ve spent page upon page spreading misleading information about Tylenol and you think that mightn’t put women off using it? 

Enough. I think I’ve made my case which of course is not my case - just what the experts are saying. I happen to believe in science. 
 

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[herbie]

Such sheer stupidity and anti-science and anti-social beliefs have turned politics into "the left" and "the wrong".

[User]

48 minutes ago, herbie said:

Such sheer stupidity and anti-science and anti-social beliefs have turned politics into "the left" and "the wrong".

I forget, can you even define what a woman is in any meaningful way? Most of those on "the left" certainly can't. 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Trump is wrong. Of course, I never said anybody should be ‘eating Tylenol’. I actually pointed out in a post that political arguments can lead to such extremism. 

Nobody even brought that up. I asked you what's the problem with a simple statement and you haven't got  an answer to that

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

 

 

There is no good evidence of that. Talk to the local experts in your province if you don’t believe me. Contact the dept of OBGYN in UBC and ask the head of dept if they agree that Tylenol causes autism. Contact anybody in authority in health care. 

The experts say that there is evidence but it's not convincing. But there is evidence. Sorry. But they're afraid of looking like they're siding with trump so they say it's perfectly safe. Fact is its not perfectly safe and wasn't before this evidence came forward, which is why twice in recent history even Tylenol has said you should minimize its use

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Of course, as if I need to say this, I do not encourage the use of any medicine in pregnancy beyond the minimum needed. 

Well you do need to say it. You've argued against it for pages now

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

You’ve spent page upon page spreading misleading information about Tylenol and you think that mightn’t put women off using it? 

So now you're back to lying again? You literally just agreed with me that the wise thing to do would be to minimize its use given the potential risks. And now you say that isn't the right thing to do, that we shouldn't restrict its use at all.

Women should be "put off" about using it. They should use it as little as possible. There are indications it could post dangers. Now you seem to be suggesting that women shouldn't and they should gobble it down as much as they like and that somehow women are too stupid to cope with a concept like "use it as little as possible"

You go back and forth, you admit that I'm right And then immediately go back to trying to claim I'm wrong.

You're dishonesty here is disgusting and you should be deeply ashamed of it. The correct answer all along is the one I started with, there are indications that there could be a risk of serious side effects, you should be minimized as much as possible.

That's what I said to begin with and it's true now and you cannot refute that so you just spent two pages trying to lie your way around it

So the question becomes why did you bother taking that much time and energy trying to disagree with something even you admit should be obvious?

And the immediate and apparent answer would be for political reasons. You hate trump, trump was the one that brought this up, therefore anything to do with this must be refuted even if you have to lie to do it because trump.

 

There are indications that there could be serious side effects from using Tylenol during pregnancy. It is logical and prudent that if something has a possible risk associated with it and a serious consequence that you absolutely minimize its use as much as possible until further research clarifies the situation. You cannot refute that you cannot argue with that and that is what is being said

So spare me your claims that it's not political, that's all it is is political for you. 

Edited September 28, 2025 by CdnFox

[Legato]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Will you stop with the political nonsense and try and evaluate the data? I have already pointed out multiple flaws with the Harvard study and even with one of the authors in this thread. He wasn’t even allowed to answer questions by his university on the paper recently and was rebuked by a judge for his testimony in a related case. By contrast, look at the Swedish study - fantastic record keeping on 2.5 million births from a unitary health system over a 25 year period. No American study on this subject compares remotely with that. 

All the political nonsense is coming from you. Trump said it so I will push the opposite.

Erring on the side of caution is obviously beyond your  comprehension. as as been pointed out many times, yet here you are peddling a point of view without considering anyone else.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Such sheer stupidity and anti-science and anti-social beliefs have turned politics into "the left" and "the wrong".

The anti-science and the antisocial benefits stuff is coming from your side sparky

[Venandi]

18 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Whatever about minor aches and pains, fever in pregnancy poses a problem for physicians in the absence of Tylenol.

It certainly would... but only if people were totally incapable of mustering the slightest pinch of common sense. Show me where I said don't take it for fever... or even don't take it at all. 

I said be aware of possible interactions during pregnancy and use some common sense. You can only do that if you are aware. You seem to be suggesting that lack of awareness is a good thing and since I don't agree, guess I'll just leave you to it...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2025 by Venandi

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, Venandi said:

It certainly would... but only if people were totally incapable of mustering the slightest pinch of common sense. Show me where I said don't take it for fever... or even don't take it at all. 

I said be aware of possible interactions during pregnancy and use some common sense. You can only do that if you are aware. You seem to be suggesting that lack of awareness is a good thing and since I don't agree, guess I'll just leave you to it...

 

 

 

 

 

This is the lie @SpankyMcFarland Has been selling, despite having it pointed out numerous times. Everyone is saying limit use, try to keep it to where it's only absolutely necessary, etc. But he knows that's reasonable and he can't argue against it but he's so infatuated with trump that he can't agree so he has to pretend that what you're saying is never ever ever used Tylenol under any circumstances

It's kind of dishonest nonsense it's so frustrating to watch. It pisses me off that we have people this stupid out there, it's not that I consider myself to be insanely intelligent it's just depressing that they are so below average

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 9/27/2025 at 9:15 PM, CdnFox said:

Depends on the time in the pregnancy.  Several optipns exist earlier on, and i believe children's aspirin is recommended through out. 

However, you're being dishonest again. And that's pretty obvious. The issue wasn't to "Take tylenol off the list". That is a lie on your part and a pretty obvious one.  The recommendation is to minimize and avoid it's use where possible. 

so if for a specific woman there's no better choice at that time of her pregnancy then fine, use it. Just keep its' use as minimal as possilbe. 

And you lied about that because you knew you were in the wrong. 

My argument doesn't require me to lie about anything in order for it to stand up. You feel the need to resort to lies and obvious ones to desperately try and shore up your argument. Pretty obvious which one of us is on the right side of this

You know you have lost the argument on whether Tylenol causes autism and now you are changing the debate into whether you would still use it or not.

OK, Dr. Fox, you’ve decided your patient needs Tylenol. What do you tell them about the risk of autism you are convinced this drug carries? 

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

23 hours ago, Legato said:

All the political nonsense is coming from you. Trump said it so I will push the opposite.

Erring on the side of caution is obviously beyond your  comprehension. as as been pointed out many times, yet here you are peddling a point of view without considering anyone else.

Erring on the side of caution doesn't make sense when you are wrong about the risks. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

This is the lie @SpankyMcFarland Has been selling, despite having it pointed out numerous times. Everyone is saying limit use, try to keep it to where it's only absolutely necessary, etc. But he knows that's reasonable and he can't argue against it but he's so infatuated with trump that he can't agree so he has to pretend that what you're saying is never ever ever used Tylenol under any circumstances

It's kind of dishonest nonsense it's so frustrating to watch. It pisses me off that we have people this stupid out there, it's not that I consider myself to be insanely intelligent it's just depressing that they are so below average

The debate is about whether Tylenol causes autism. You have presented no good evidence that would convince most responsible Canadian physicians that it does, just a bunch of people as uninformed as yourself. The fact that you would still use it despite your claims opens up a whole different set of problems for you and anybody who listens to you. 

The person who is infatuated with Trump here is not me as any reasonable person can see. 
 

 

Edited September 29, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[Legato]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Erring on the side of caution doesn't make sense when you are wrong about the risks. 

Yeah, how many time have we been told there will be no risk in taking this drug.

Here's one....

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/22/the-mothers-fighting-a-scandal-bigger-than-thalidomide-we-were-told-the-medication-was-safe

[SpankyMcFarland]

1 minute ago, Legato said:

Yeah, how many time have we been told there will be no risk in taking this drug.

Here's one....

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/22/the-mothers-fighting-a-scandal-bigger-than-thalidomide-we-were-told-the-medication-was-safe

Completely different drug and set of evidence. 

[Legato]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Completely different drug and set of evidence. 

Hayzeus man, it's not the drug but the premise of safe drugs.

Just quit with the circular argument.

I will not respond to your obvious lack of comprehension. so take your argument to those TDS friends of yours.

[SpankyMcFarland]

28 minutes ago, Legato said:

Hayzeus man, it's not the drug but the premise of safe drugs.

Just quit with the circular argument.

I will not respond to your obvious lack of comprehension. so take your argument to those TDS friends of yours.

I’m in a madhouse of Trump fans. In Canada which is even more reprehensible. Are you not able to read and understand any of the evidence I have presented here? 

Raising false fears about Tylenol will discourage women from using it who would have benefited from it. You will reduce the quality of health care for those who believe you. 

Drugs have enough genuine risks without inventing more.
 

 

Edited September 29, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

On 9/27/2025 at 8:09 AM, Venandi said:

I don't want to put words in your mouth but it seems like your "go to argument" for regular use is actually the worst case scenario where people (i'll say like me) would actually use and even recommend Tylenol as a rational choice under the circumstances. 

All of this comes down to the possibility of a connection vs making a rational threat assessment... if women are aware of a possible connection I think they can be trusted to chose wisely.

I look at it from the vantage point of busy pregnant women using it routinely for low level pain relief like sore knees, back pain, headaches etc that may be (or even not be) associated with pregnancy... and doing that with a feeling of confidence that may be misplaced. That confidence may be why they use it routinely and most of them would (and could) easily just "suck it up" if they where aware of a possible connection.   

That's really it from my perspective... If I were using it routinely for low level pain relief because I believed it to be safe and innocuous only to find out that the government sat on information suggesting it wasn't I'd be severely pi$$ed. 

I'd say remove "Trump bluster" and politics from the equation entirely, spend 5 minutes with Dr Google, and do the rational threat assessments most thoughtful women are easily capable of making.

That's it that's all.... 

But some women will surely listen to arguments like yours and say to themselves, I don’t want to raise my risk of having an autistic child at all, and will avoid Tylenol altogether when they are ill and would have benefited from it.