https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kenvue-kimberly-clark-acquisiti...
We're gonna have people saying Tylenol causes Autism/ADHD for at least another 5 years.
Presidents have had civil immunity since Mississippi vs Johnson (1867), which was reaffirmed in Nixon vs Fitzgerald (1982).
Barr v. Matteo (1959) is probably most on point here; providing immunity from libel for statements made by government officials as part of their job.
Taking Tylenol doesn’t have a huge benefit, but severe autism is a catastrophe.
Even though the causation is not proven, correlation might give you pause to have such a catastrophic result.
There are a lot of people who are not parents discussing this, but as a parent, I don’t think I would let my wife take tylenol during pregnancy.
You would have a valid point if there was a correlation.
There is no correlation between Tylenol and autism and ADHD.
I can't wait to find out how many tens of millions of Trump and Ivanka and Baron Coin they bought, and for nothing to be ever done about it.
There are a lot of things that it could be that changed to bring more autism in society. It could also be a multi-generational affect of things started close to a century ago. We have a lot of food that isn't anything someone a couple hundred years ago would consider "food"... highly processed, industrialized, refined, etc. The fact is, we largely don't know, and a lot of affects are individualized.
Changes in the diagnostic criteria and increased screening at wellness visits seem to be the main contributors. There have been a few studies over the past two years that have looked at a specific subgroup of individuals on the spectrum who frequently need 24-hour-a-day support and care from a caregiver, often have very limited verbal communication skills, or have intellectual disability that co-occurs with autism.
The data has shown that rates of autism for that subgroup have increased minimally, if at all, over the past nearly 10 years.
Autism diagnoses are on the rise – but autism itself may not be
Autism is better known and diagnosed than ever before, leading to misconceptions that cases are skyrocketing.
I'm sure the rising numbers include lots of people like me. People who for all intents and purposes don't have autism in the manner that people think about when they're imagining or being made afraid of someone very different.
I really don’t think that’s true. e.g. having a fever for a prolonged period could endanger the woman and/or the baby and taking Tylenol would be a risk reducer by comparison.
> There are a lot of things that it could be that changed to bring more autism in society.
Also quite possible that there isn’t any more autism in society, just that greater awareness has led to increased diagnoses.
Fevers are known to be dangerous to a fetus, especially in the first trimester. Embracing a known danger to avoid an unknown potential one seems crazy.
In fact, if NAC was added to paracetamol by default (which seems to be safe), it would make it nigh impossible to overdose on it, where paracetamol accounts for the most drug overdoses in Western countries and is the leading cause of acute liver failure.
There’s more but that’s just one example.
You then back that up with a study doesn't provide evidence for all three claims. The study is about mice that are genetically altered to develop lung tumors after virus inhalation. The study doesn't indicate that cancer is caused, but that tumors develop faster. The study is not about NAC, but about supplementation of both NAC and Vitamin E.
The study is also unclear about how much NAC and Vitamin E the mice were fed through water and chow, but they seem to have been fed quite large dose. If I do some napkin calculations based on average eating, drinking and mouse weight, it would be 133 mg of NAC per kg of body weight. While a normal dose of NAC for a human would be 600 to 1800 mg per day, which for a 65 kg human comes down to 28 mg per kg of body weight.
It's a relevant study, but a far cry from your initial statement. Your initial statement was also very short, low-effort and required clarification from someone else.
Edit: to connect the dots:
How mice studies are used
Experiments on mice have helped scientists understand how the carcinogens in cigarette smoke damage DNA and cause cancer, which complements epidemiological data from human studies. These animal studies have been crucial in establishing the link between smoking and cancer since at least the 1950s.
You could have said that there's limited evidence from a single mouse study that suggests that NAC might promote tumor growth in humans as well. That's fair. But you didn't. You (falsely) stated that "NAC causes cancer in humans".
In the end, nothing proven. Everything politics.
Whereas the timeline of Phenacetin(which becomes paracetamol) became extremely popular to use in the 1890s; especially in germany because of Bayer.
1911, autism was coined because of ~10 year old kids in germany.
Autism wasnt super prevalent, then we got rid of Phenactin in the 1970s for straight up paracetamol. Autism has been skyrocketting in prevalence since.
The theoretical damage that it would cause the fetus matches up well with our disabilities. The theoretical fixes also match up well with how our community tends to treat themselves.
oulipo2•2mo ago
OfflineSergio•2mo ago