Tylenol link to Autism

Of the Following . . . Originally Posted by biomed1

Yeat you allowed a post about DRUGS. I thought post about DRUGs were against rules.

Yeat you allowed a post about DRUGS. I thought post about DRUGs were against rules. Originally Posted by Ripmany

Do refer to the Guidelines before you post embarrassing stuff in the Open Forums . . .

#14 - There is no place in our forums for the general discussion or speculation of illicit drug use. This is to be considered a forbidden topic and mention of it will be removed.

The KEY WORD in the Guideline is Illicit . . .

Not sure reading and comprehension are a skill set with some. I try to consider the source but some are just too bad to stomach.

... Whatever the case there, mate. ... I surely do believe
that MORE study needs to be done to see IF there may be
a link between Tylenol and Autism.

... And I don't believe that Mr. Kennedy is pushing this
just to have "fat-cat" barristers take money $$$$$ away
from the chem companys. ... I believe he is concerned for
the welfare of people.

#### Salty

Once again. There was autism prior to the existence of acetaminophen. So claiming it causes or significantly contributes is not at all supported by any studies. This DHH is not data driven. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Driven by an ego maniac who made a brash claim that he'd get to th bottom of why we have autism.

Instead of unleashing more scientist, he fired them.

Instead of following facts, he merely created Alternative ones.

Instead of providing substantive research- he's called up loonies who have been debunked and proven wrong.


YET- we have a moronic leader and followers who really WANT to believe that this is the truth- when it's been proven to not be.

Whenever this administration says they've got ideas- plans, concepts, and more- you know the next words are " in two weeks". well, science doesn't work like that- and this administration has taken almost every knowledgeable scientist or statistician and thrown them out the door. Truly a place where a puppy shooting governor with fake tits, face, and hair, is put in charge of the border. The dumbest fake fuck in charge of pretend wrestling is in charge of our KIDS education!

I could go on, but this is literally the most insane group of people in the world all working together to demonize acetaminophen as bad. Just to have a media minute- still even if it's wrong.

Just to be able to say they did SOMETHING. The reality is the administration is doing NOTHING for the people.

I cannot wait for the pending lawsuits for defamation without proof start to come around. It's terrible but the only thing that will hold the corruption to a minimum.

Good thing that Eye knows more on the subject than Harvard’s school of public health and can keep us all up to date.

You'd agree then that drug companies that make and sell acetaminophen shouldn't get sued for causing ADHD... Originally Posted by Tiny

Not necessarily. In a free country, we have a forum to try and prove a case, if it exists. I mean, if someone feels aggrieved, why not let them take their best shot if they have some data? Apparently the courts have allowed the existing suits to proceed. Will they prevail? Dunno...

The whole point on Autism is not that it's the Tylenol exclusively, but there are signs, such as being pregnant, that warrant informed caution versus tyranny and blanket protections.

Bigger picture, a noble one at that, is that Autism is ascending and it's unlikely that simply reclassifying previous observations into a group bucket solves the issue. That is the whole point RFK Jr is raising. It's called awareness.

RFK is Right! Autism Rates Skyrocketing, Autistic People Largely Unable to Live Independently
by Antonio Graceffo Sep. 1, 2025

RFK Jr.’s warning about skyrocketing autism rates has drawn sharp criticism from advocates who insist that “kids with autism are not broken” and can lead full lives. Yet their rebuttals often support his point.

They highlight students graduating only with extensive assistance from multiple social workers and lowered academic standards, and adults employed just a few hours a week in heavily accommodated roles, sometimes unpaid.

Rutgers University’s Center for Adult Autism Services reports that in New Jersey, 1 in 20 boys and 1 in 85 girls are diagnosed with autism.

Nationwide, data from the Department of Health and Human Services shows prevalence rising from 1 in 36 children to 1 in 31, nearly five times higher than when the CDC began tracking children born in 1992.

The National Center for Special Abilities cites a 6,000% increase, overwhelming schools, healthcare systems, and social services.

Current CDC figures place autism rates at 23 per 1,000, compared with just 0.5 per 1,000 in the 1960s and 1970s and about 1 per 1,000 in the 1980s.

The contrast with earlier decades is striking. In his landmark 1943 paper, child psychiatrist Leo Kanner described his 11 autism cases as “markedly and uniquely different from anything reported so far.”

If today’s rates had existed then, autism would hardly have been considered novel. A 2009 study found autism incidence rose 7- to 8-fold from the early 1990s to 2007.

Diagnostic changes, inclusion of milder cases, and earlier detection explain only part of that growth, about a 4.25-fold increase, leaving much of the surge unexplained.

California data further undermines the “better diagnosis” argument, showing no evidence of a hidden population of autistic adults born between 1931 and the early 1980s...

No reason to try to push the ADHD monster in a closet and lock the door. Take it out and investigate it. I mean, would it not be ludicrous to ignore it and not try to define and treat it? Perhaps reduce or illuminate it if a reasonable linkage can be found?

Regardless, we don't stand a shot in hell if we ignore it.

Bigger picture, a noble one at that, is that Autism is ascending and it's unlikely that simply reclassifying previous observations into a group bucket solves the issue. That is the whole point RFK Jr is raising. It's called awareness.No reason to try to push the ADHD monster in a closet and lock the door. Take it out and investigate it. I mean, would it not be ludicrous to ignore it and not try to define and treat it? Perhaps reduce or illuminate it if a reasonable linkage can be found?

Regardless, we don't stand a shot in hell if we ignore it. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

No problem investigating it. While like you I lean libertarian, I believe the relative drop in the bucket we pay for medical research at the NIH and universities is well worth it. The problem is what RFK Jr. prioritizes. My sources tell me this is how 2026 funding will break out,

Killer vaccine research : 52%
Killer drug like Tylenol research: 20%
Heart research 10%
Cancer research 8%
Metabolic diseases (e.g. diabetes) 3%
Infectious diseases 2%
Lung dseases 1%
Other 4%

I asked ChatGPT what's caused the increase in diagnoses of ADHD and autism. (She's a lot smarter than you or me btw. She tells me she can score 1590 or 1600 on the SAT.) Anyway she believes the increase in ADHD in almost entirely from expanded recognition and broader labeling. For autism, she thinks about 60% of the increase is from diagnostic and reporting changes, 25% to 33% from "diagnostic change/substitution" (instead of saying a kid is retarded or has intellectual disability now they say he's autistic), and the rest, 7% to 15% may be from environmental changes and drugs and whatnot.

I think you used to say the reason so many people died from COVID was because the hospitals got paid more to say they died from COVID. I don't know about that, but guar-an-damn-tee that the schools milk autism and ADHD diagnoses for every dollar they can get.

Not necessarily. In a free country, we have a forum to try and prove a case, if it exists. I mean, if someone feels aggrieved, why not let them take their best shot if they have some data? Apparently the courts have allowed the existing suits to proceed. Will they prevail? Dunno...

The whole point on Autism is not that it's the Tylenol exclusively, but there are signs, such as being pregnant, that warrant informed caution versus tyranny and blanket protections. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

There are certain ways that your property can be stolen from you. Some bunch like Antifa or Pol Pot's government can claim it for the people, or the glorious state. A despot or mafia type can take it from you at gunpoint. Or a plaintiffs lawyer can sue you and take everything you've got, when you didn't do anything wrong. You have a proper appreciation of the first two ways, but appear dead set on ignoring the third, perhaps at your peril someday.

Our friend McCain owned Moderna stock. For all we know he might have invested his life savings in it. Somebody like Kennedy comes along, who's in the pocket of the plaintiffs' attorneys, and makes it where they bankrupt Moderna. And everything McCain's fought and scrimped for all his life goes up in smoke. Even though Moderna's vaccine saved 100 lives or more for every person it killed, Moderna gets fucked. The vaccine disappears. Next time there's a pandemic more people die because nobody wants to develop a vaccine and get bankrupted by the lawyers.

Tylenol's the physician's mainstay for fever and pain relief during pregnancy. It's much safer than the alternatives. And Kennedy wants to take that away, all for the sake of the Almighty Buck.

...Our friend McCain owned Moderna stock. For all we know he might have invested his life savings in it. Somebody like Kennedy comes along, who's in the pocket of the plaintiffs' attorneys, and makes it where they bankrupt Moderna. And everything McCain's fought and scrimped for all his life goes up in smoke... Originally Posted by Tiny

I don't raise chickens, but my brother in-law does. Neither of us puts all our eggs in one basket - unless we are watching it very closely.

...Even though Moderna's vaccine saved 100 lives or more for every person it killed, Moderna gets fucked... Originally Posted by Tiny

Lemme guess, according to Moderna. AmmIrite?!? Thought they wanted to hold their results from release for something like 75 years. Or was that Pfizer?

...Tylenol's the physician's mainstay for fever and pain relief during pregnancy. It's much safer than the alternatives. And Kennedy wants to take that away, all for the sake of the Almighty Buck. Originally Posted by Tiny

This is why we can't have nice things. Kennedy is doing a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y no sucha thing. He merely wants to be as transparent as possible and show all sides of the science and let people and their Doctors make informed choices.

IMMHO - The real crimes against humanity for the covid, besides it's creation and release, was the censorship and coordinated gas lighting of a single, Politburo, narrative and blanket immunity protection.

Here's an interesting question to ponder (may post a thread about it later).
I figure you'll try to us AI, of course. Anyway, here goes:

When was the first time that the notion of an influenza-like virus emerging through the wet market in Wuhan, be proposed to cause a global pandemic?

Kennedy is doing a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y no sucha thing. He merely wants to be as transparent as possible and show all sides of the science and let people and their Doctors make informed choices. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Then why did he remove all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and replace them with vaccine skeptics?

Why did he force Peter Marks to resign?

Why did he fire Susan Monaraz?

Why does he give advice that contradicts my doctor's?

IMMHO - The real crimes against humanity for the covid, besides it's creation and release, was the censorship and coordinated gas lighting of a single, Politburo, narrative and blanket immunity protection. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I don't know what it was like in the People's Republic of Austin, but here in God's country people could pretty darn well do whatever they wanted except for about a month and a half. People on ISG were banging sugar babies in places like Mexico City and Bogota, Colombia for pennies on the dollar. You didn't have to contend with crowds at airports. You could work from home. It was a great time to be alive!

Here's an interesting question to ponder (may post a thread about it later).
I figure you'll try to us AI, of course. Anyway, here goes:

When was the first time that the notion of an influenza-like virus emerging through the wet market in Wuhan, be proposed to cause a global pandemic? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I don't know about global pandemic, but certainly there were flu strains that got started in wet markets long before COVID. There's speculation that Chinese researchers' data posted on a virology database was removed because it was a smoking gun, that implicated the Wuhan wet market in the spread of COVID. And that would refute the government's claim that the wet markets had been closed. And more importantly its argument that the pandemic didn't originate in China. Remember some in China claimed the U.S. government intentionally engineered the virus and started the pandemic.

I'm agnostic on this though. I don't know whether the virus came from the Wuhan lab, with or without gain of function research. Or through the Wuhan or another wet market or directly from bats. Would you like me to ask ChatGPT what she thinks?

Then why did he remove all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and replace them with vaccine skeptics?... Originally Posted by Tiny

Two thoughts, in no particular order:

- Just disposing of partisan hacks. Cultists, Politburo slunts, what ever. No different than what needed to be done - and was - with the EDVA. Nothing quite like a good wipe or clean sweep...

- Seems like the phrase "vaccine skeptic" is just Gas Bagging from an entirely complicit media, in a derogatory manner. Why not call them scientists engaging in open, aka transparent debate? When did that become a bad thing?!?

...Seems like the phrase "vaccine skeptic" is just Gas Bagging from an entirely complicit media, in a derogatory manner. Why not call them scientists engaging in open, aka transparent debate? When did that become a bad thing?!? Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

When they started endangering people's lives with their misinformation and self-serving lies.

The "complicit media" was actually being too kind in using the term "vaccine skeptic." It implies a bit of unwarranted and undeserved credibility.