4 ms·

If RFK Jr says it's true, that's how I know it isn't. They go to great lengths to point out they're "using gold-standard science", which also makes me certain t

If RFK Jr says it's true, that's how I know it isn't. They go to great lengths to point out they're "using gold-standard science", which also makes me certain they aren't. They can't be, because none of this is about autism or science, it's about pushing their political agenda.

ekianjo 1y ago
> that's how I know it isn't. Until you have a controlled study on pregnant women who use and don't use the drug, you won't really know for sure.
- jeroenhd 1y ago
  Until we have a controlled study, we don't really know if using nouns causes autism either. We don't know what causes autism so everything is suspect. https://news.ki.se/no-link-between-paracetamol-use-during-pregnancy-and-autism-or-adhd-in-children https://news.ki.se/no-link-between-paracetamol-use-during-pr... concludes that there is no link between acetaminophen and autism based on existing research. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01208-0 https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-... concludes the opposite. I'm not qualified to determine which of these studies is more reliable, but the evidence is far from clear if multiple literature studies state the opposite conclusion. News articles seem to state that the conclusions are clear as day but the same websites were equally sure of the opposite last year. I'll wait or reliable sources of medical information, which the US government no longer is, to comment on these papers rather than assume whatever paper made the HN frontpage last is the final result of the scientific debate.
  - ekianjo 1y ago
    > We don't know what causes autism so everything is suspect. Obviously what goes into your body should be suspected first, whether it's food, pollutants, or medical interventions.
    - crote 1y ago
      Why? Should we first suspect carrots of making people grow red hair, suspect eggs of causing pregnancy, and suspect Left Twix of causing left-handedness? We don't know the cause of autism. We do know that autism has a heritable component, with significant rates of both siblings having it (which could be explained by environmental factors) and both parent and child having it (which cannot be explained by environmental factors). Surely it would make a lot more sense to suspect a genetic component first?
      - ekianjo 1y ago
        You don't get a 100x increase in a lifetime by using a genetic explanation, sorry
- kashunstva 1y ago
  > Until you have a controlled study on pregnant women I wouldn’t look for a prospective randomized controlled trial of this anytime soon. Hard to imagine an IRB approving such a study. Observational studies do suggest a small but statistically significant association between acetaminophen use in pregnancy and ASD, but the relative risk increase is small, because both the effect size and baseline risk are small.
  - ekianjo 1y ago
    Isn't the baseline risk for autism 1 in 30 presently?
stuaxo 1y ago
Why is he so against medicine?
- flouridist 1y ago
  [dead]
- CharlesW 1y ago
  Because that stance has been very beneficial for him financially and politically, ever since his pivot from legitimate and respected environmental lawyer to anti-vaxxer. He transitioned after receiving incredibly positive feedback for amplifying conspiratorial narratives while riding the coattails of the infamous "thimerosal causes autism" panic of the 2000s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Immunity
- sixothree 1y ago
  That's how he got where he is today.
- SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
  He explained his views in detail in his confirmation hearing. He believes that pharmaceuticals in general are dangerous and overused, "the third-largest cause of death in our country after heart attacks and cancers" in his words, and wants healthcare to focus more on healthy food than on medicine.
  - krapp 1y ago
    > (...) and wants healthcare to focus more on healthy food than on medicine. This is the guy who caught a worm in his brain from eating roadkill?
- esbranson 1y ago
  Same reason he's anti-fish.
Spivak 1y ago
Which is what? Lots of this admin's actions have made sense once you know the underlying agenda—thanks project 2025 for spelling a lot of it out—but this one has me baffled. Taking on the woke… tylenol industry?
- avalys 1y ago
  It’s simple, RFKj is a well-intentioned idiot.
  - Spivak 1y ago
    Looking around for sources from before the world ended I can find quite a few reputable studies that show the correlation. The effect size is small ~0.4% in absolute risk but statistically detectable. Like okay, sure. Doctors already tell pregnant women to limit NSAIDs. So… we keep doing that. Mission accomplished?
    - kashunstva 1y ago
      The advice to avoid NSAIDs in pregnancy (and contraindication in the third trimester) doesn’t cover acetaminophen, though, because it’s not regarded as an NSAID (different mechanism of action and minimal anti-inflammatory effects.) From a recent meta analysis, a total of 6 studies meeting the inclusion criteria addressed the association between acetaminophen exposure in utero and ASD. The odds ratio for the aggregated data was 1.19 which puts the 0.2-0.4% relative risk increase depending on what baseline incidence you assume (along the lines of your estimate.) If you take the baseline incidence to be 1% then I calculate the NNH - number needed to harm, at 533, meaning you have to expose 533 pregnant women to acetaminophen to observe one additional case of ASD. Given that the current public health administration of this era in the U.S. operates by seat-of-the-pants guidance rather than statistical evidence, the statistics are irrelevant to them. My advice would be that health care providers caring for pregnant women have an informed discussion about the risk and call it a day.
y-curious 1y ago
While you're probably right in the outcome, you probably shouldn't argue based on the genetic fallacy[1] 1: https://www.scribbr.co.uk/fallacy/the-genetic-fallacy/#:~:text=The%20genetic%20fallacy%20is%20the,the%20truth%20of%20the%20claim. https://www.scribbr.co.uk/fallacy/the-genetic-fallacy/#:~:te...
- SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
  There's a threshold where you just don't have a choice. He's made a number of obvious and verifiable health lies - most recently, he described how he can diagnose children with "mitochondrial challenges" by watching them walk around. I have a job, I don't have time to individually investigate all his health claims, the heuristic that he's a liar and everything he says is wrong will have to suffice.
  - aeternum 1y ago
    What's the primary factor contributing to metabolic syndrome in children? And are you really claiming you can't determine that factor by looking?
    - SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
      I don't understand the response. Kennedy didn't say "factor" or "metabolic syndrome", he said "I see these kids that are just overburdened with mitochondrial challenges". If all he meant was that many kids are visibly overweight, wouldn't he have just said that?
      - aeternum 1y ago
        The charitable interpretation is that it is simply a more sensitive and accurate way to say that. It puts aside all the big is beautiful and similar takes and points to the fact that many American kids, especially those in certain parts of the country are now afflicted with metabolic syndrome (which is closely associated with mitochondrial disfunction). It is well-known that overloading mitochondria with sugar is quite bad for them and a key contributor to type 2 diabetes. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10036395/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10036395/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428560/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428560/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4408906/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4408906/
add-sub-mul-div 1y ago
> If RFK Jr says it's true, that's how I know it isn't. And one of the reasons you don't let morons take over your party is that if they ever are right, they won't be believed. If these are actual risks with Tylenol then oops, that take is being lumped in with the antivax hysteria.
- esbranson 1y ago
  > don't let morons take over your party Oops for sure. Like if someone says school closures won't have an effect on infection rates, not only will you not be believed, you'll be "anti-science", whatever that means.
kristianp 1y ago
> it's about pushing their political agenda. I've seen this kind of thing mentioned before. As a non USA person, I don't know what the deal is with RFK and autism. Wasn't it vaccines last month?
- reverius42 1y ago
  It's about pushing general distrust of the medical/pharmaceutical establishment, in favor of folk wisdom, home remedies, and anything "natural".
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

ekianjo 1y ago

> that's how I know it isn't. Until you have a controlled study on pregnant women who use and don't use the drug, you won't really know for sure.

jeroenhd 1y ago
Until we have a controlled study, we don't really know if using nouns causes autism either. We don't know what causes autism so everything is suspect. https://news.ki.se/no-link-between-paracetamol-use-during-pregnancy-and-autism-or-adhd-in-children https://news.ki.se/no-link-between-paracetamol-use-during-pr... concludes that there is no link between acetaminophen and autism based on existing research. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01208-0 https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-... concludes the opposite. I'm not qualified to determine which of these studies is more reliable, but the evidence is far from clear if multiple literature studies state the opposite conclusion. News articles seem to state that the conclusions are clear as day but the same websites were equally sure of the opposite last year. I'll wait or reliable sources of medical information, which the US government no longer is, to comment on these papers rather than assume whatever paper made the HN frontpage last is the final result of the scientific debate.
- ekianjo 1y ago
  > We don't know what causes autism so everything is suspect. Obviously what goes into your body should be suspected first, whether it's food, pollutants, or medical interventions.
  - crote 1y ago
    Why? Should we first suspect carrots of making people grow red hair, suspect eggs of causing pregnancy, and suspect Left Twix of causing left-handedness? We don't know the cause of autism. We do know that autism has a heritable component, with significant rates of both siblings having it (which could be explained by environmental factors) and both parent and child having it (which cannot be explained by environmental factors). Surely it would make a lot more sense to suspect a genetic component first?
    - ekianjo 1y ago
      You don't get a 100x increase in a lifetime by using a genetic explanation, sorry
kashunstva 1y ago
> Until you have a controlled study on pregnant women I wouldn’t look for a prospective randomized controlled trial of this anytime soon. Hard to imagine an IRB approving such a study. Observational studies do suggest a small but statistically significant association between acetaminophen use in pregnancy and ASD, but the relative risk increase is small, because both the effect size and baseline risk are small.
- ekianjo 1y ago
  Isn't the baseline risk for autism 1 in 30 presently?

stuaxo 1y ago

Why is he so against medicine?

flouridist 1y ago
[dead]
CharlesW 1y ago
Because that stance has been very beneficial for him financially and politically, ever since his pivot from legitimate and respected environmental lawyer to anti-vaxxer. He transitioned after receiving incredibly positive feedback for amplifying conspiratorial narratives while riding the coattails of the infamous "thimerosal causes autism" panic of the 2000s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadly_Immunity
sixothree 1y ago
That's how he got where he is today.
SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
He explained his views in detail in his confirmation hearing. He believes that pharmaceuticals in general are dangerous and overused, "the third-largest cause of death in our country after heart attacks and cancers" in his words, and wants healthcare to focus more on healthy food than on medicine.
- krapp 1y ago
  > (...) and wants healthcare to focus more on healthy food than on medicine. This is the guy who caught a worm in his brain from eating roadkill?
esbranson 1y ago
Same reason he's anti-fish.

Spivak 1y ago

Which is what? Lots of this admin's actions have made sense once you know the underlying agenda—thanks project 2025 for spelling a lot of it out—but this one has me baffled. Taking on the woke… tylenol industry?

avalys 1y ago
It’s simple, RFKj is a well-intentioned idiot.
- Spivak 1y ago
  Looking around for sources from before the world ended I can find quite a few reputable studies that show the correlation. The effect size is small ~0.4% in absolute risk but statistically detectable. Like okay, sure. Doctors already tell pregnant women to limit NSAIDs. So… we keep doing that. Mission accomplished?
  - kashunstva 1y ago
    The advice to avoid NSAIDs in pregnancy (and contraindication in the third trimester) doesn’t cover acetaminophen, though, because it’s not regarded as an NSAID (different mechanism of action and minimal anti-inflammatory effects.) From a recent meta analysis, a total of 6 studies meeting the inclusion criteria addressed the association between acetaminophen exposure in utero and ASD. The odds ratio for the aggregated data was 1.19 which puts the 0.2-0.4% relative risk increase depending on what baseline incidence you assume (along the lines of your estimate.) If you take the baseline incidence to be 1% then I calculate the NNH - number needed to harm, at 533, meaning you have to expose 533 pregnant women to acetaminophen to observe one additional case of ASD. Given that the current public health administration of this era in the U.S. operates by seat-of-the-pants guidance rather than statistical evidence, the statistics are irrelevant to them. My advice would be that health care providers caring for pregnant women have an informed discussion about the risk and call it a day.

y-curious 1y ago

While you're probably right in the outcome, you probably shouldn't argue based on the genetic fallacy[1] 1: https://www.scribbr.co.uk/fallacy/the-genetic-fallacy/#:~:text=The%20genetic%20fallacy%20is%20the,the%20truth%20of%20the%20claim. https://www.scribbr.co.uk/fallacy/the-genetic-fallacy/#:~:te...

SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
There's a threshold where you just don't have a choice. He's made a number of obvious and verifiable health lies - most recently, he described how he can diagnose children with "mitochondrial challenges" by watching them walk around. I have a job, I don't have time to individually investigate all his health claims, the heuristic that he's a liar and everything he says is wrong will have to suffice.
- aeternum 1y ago
  What's the primary factor contributing to metabolic syndrome in children? And are you really claiming you can't determine that factor by looking?
  - SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
    I don't understand the response. Kennedy didn't say "factor" or "metabolic syndrome", he said "I see these kids that are just overburdened with mitochondrial challenges". If all he meant was that many kids are visibly overweight, wouldn't he have just said that?
    - aeternum 1y ago
      The charitable interpretation is that it is simply a more sensitive and accurate way to say that. It puts aside all the big is beautiful and similar takes and points to the fact that many American kids, especially those in certain parts of the country are now afflicted with metabolic syndrome (which is closely associated with mitochondrial disfunction). It is well-known that overloading mitochondria with sugar is quite bad for them and a key contributor to type 2 diabetes. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10036395/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10036395/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428560/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32428560/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4408906/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4408906/

add-sub-mul-div 1y ago

> If RFK Jr says it's true, that's how I know it isn't. And one of the reasons you don't let morons take over your party is that if they ever are right, they won't be believed. If these are actual risks with Tylenol then oops, that take is being lumped in with the antivax hysteria.

esbranson 1y ago
> don't let morons take over your party Oops for sure. Like if someone says school closures won't have an effect on infection rates, not only will you not be believed, you'll be "anti-science", whatever that means.

kristianp 1y ago

> it's about pushing their political agenda. I've seen this kind of thing mentioned before. As a non USA person, I don't know what the deal is with RFK and autism. Wasn't it vaccines last month?

reverius42 1y ago
It's about pushing general distrust of the medical/pharmaceutical establishment, in favor of folk wisdom, home remedies, and anything "natural".

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]