Lone Candle
Champion of Truth
The studies that best control for confounding factors do not find a link between Tylenol and autism.
Among all studies, some find a negative correlation, some find no correlation, and many find a very small positive correlation, but in the best studies, this is not found, indicating there isn’t a causal link.
Tylenol helps control fever, which can prevent fever-caused health issues with the baby.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx5xH1zs4Tc
RFK and Trump are spewing bullshit about autism and misinforming the public.
RFK and Trump are spewing bullshit about vaccines and misinforming the public.
RFK and Trump are spewing bullshit about medicine and disease, misinforming the public.
RFK chose two less rigorous studies to justify his advice on Tylenol while ignoring larger, more rigorous studies that find no association between Tylenol and ADHD or autism.
Fever can harm the unborn child and even cause miscarriage. Tylenol can prevent that by lowering the fever. Because Trump told women to not take Tylenol, some women won’t take it when they should, with bad consequences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohsYDUj0gfU
“A 2024 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that “comprehensive data on pregnant women incarcerated in state prisons and local jails do not exist” even though the U.S. has “one of the highest maternal mortality rates” and “incarcerates women at the highest rate in the world.””
https://reason.com/2025/05/23/pregnant-women-in-prison-arent-getting-care-and-no-one-is-keeping-track/
Is Elon Musk a narcissist obsessed with impregnating many women with his seed and creating offspring who he sees as his superior legion of humans? Elon doesn’t seem to help take care of the children he is producing.
The demographic crisis is real, and Americans do need to have more children, but that doesn’t mean Elon isn’t a big-headed narcissist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7bzw8_MJpA
“According to a new investigation from The Marshall Project, hospitals are giving women drugs during labor and then reporting them to child welfare services when they later test positive for those same drugs. These cases are one of the more maddening side effects of an out-of-control drug war combined with strict mandatory reporting laws.”
https://reason.com/2024/12/13/hospitals-are-giving-pregnant-women-drugs-then-reporting-them-to-cps-when-they-test-positive/
“In a dissenting opinion, Lumpkin argued that Aguilar’s marijuana use should have been illegal because “only [she] has a permit to use it, not her baby.” Thus, “the baby’s exposure to [Aguilar’s] use and possession of marijuana, a Schedule I drug, is illegal.”
Judge David B. Lewis takes up a similar theme in his dissent, writing that “a medical marijuana license is certainly not a legal authorization to share, transfer, or distribute marijuana to others who have no license, especially those for whom its use or possession is unauthorized by law.” And “who could really doubt that a licensed marijuana consumer would face legal consequences for willfully sharing, distributing, or permitting the unlicensed ingestion of marijuana by children for whose welfare they are responsible?””
…
“Fetal personhood is most often invoked as a justification for banning abortion. But it also can be used to justify all sorts of restrictions on pregnant women or criminal penalties for those who do anything that the state says isn’t in a fetus’ best interests. It’s grounds for everything from charges against women who do drugs while pregnant (something Rowland generally endorses, writing that “an expectant mother who exposes her unborn child to illegal methamphetamine could be convicted of child neglect”) to punishing a pregnant woman for getting shot because she put herself in harms’ way.”
https://reason.com/2024/07/30/a-fetus-doesnt-need-its-own-medical-marijuana-license-oklahoma-court-says/
“a notoriously right-wing federal appeals court attempted to rewrite a federal law that, among other things, requires most US hospitals to provide abortions to patients who are experiencing a medical emergency if a doctor determines that an abortion will stabilize the patient.
The case is Texas v. Becerra, and all three of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s judges who joined this opinion were appointed by Republicans. Two, including Kurt Engelhardt, the opinion’s author, were appointed by former President Donald Trump.
The case involves the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a federal statute requiring hospitals that accept Medicare funds to provide “such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition” of “any individual” who arrives at the hospital’s ER with an “emergency medical condition.” (In limited circumstances, the hospital may transfer the patient to a different facility that will provide this stabilizing treatment.)
EMTALA contains no carve-out for abortion. It simply states that, whenever any patient arrives at a Medicare-funded hospital with a medical emergency, the hospital must offer that patient whatever treatment is necessary to “stabilize the medical condition” that caused the emergency. So, if a patient’s emergency condition can only be stabilized by an abortion, federal law requires nearly all hospitals to provide that treatment. (Hospitals can opt out of EMTALA by not taking Medicare funds but, because Medicare funds health care for elderly Americans, very few hospitals do opt out.)
This federal law, moreover, also states that it overrides (or “preempts,” to use the appropriate legal term) state and local laws “to the extent that the [state law] directly conflicts with a requirement of this section.” So, in states with sweeping abortion bans that prohibit some or all medically necessary abortions, the state law must give way to EMTALA’s requirement that all patients must be offered whatever treatment is necessary to stabilize their condition.”
…
“when an emergency room patient presents with a life-threatening illness or condition — or, in the words of the EMTALA statute, that patient has a condition that places their health “in serious jeopardy,” that threatens “serious impairment to bodily functions,” or “serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part” — then Medicare-funded hospitals must provide whatever treatment is necessary.
The Texas case, in other words, asks whether a state government can force a woman to die, or suffer lasting injury to her uterus or other reproductive organs, because the state’s lawmakers are so opposed to abortion that they will not permit it, even when such an abortion is required by federal law.
And yet, despite the fact that the EMTALA statute is unambiguous, and despite the fact that this case only involves patients whose life or health is threatened by a pregnancy, three Fifth Circuit judges told those patients that they have no right to potentially lifesaving medical care.”
https://www.vox.com/scotus/2024/1/3/24023889/abortion-supreme-court-emtala-fifth-circuit-texas-becerra
“In a 2020 review of relevant studies published since the mid-1980s, the authors called out many of these studies for weak methodology. In particular, many researchers had failed to compare the outcomes they were measuring against any kind of a standard that would account for age and parental educational level. (That is: What if the kids of those who used cannabis during pregnancy were born to parents with lower levels of education, which could account for some differences?)
The review authors concluded that overall, “prenatal cannabis exposure is associated with few effects on the cognitive functioning of offspring.” What’s more, they noted, even when abnormalities were identified, almost all were still within the range of normal.”
…
“Despite the imperfect data, Mark suspects the risk of fetal harm with prenatal cannabis use is high enough to support recommending against purely recreational use.
But many aren’t seeking to get high.”
“Nicole Harper, pregnant with her daughter, was driving her SUV home on a Arkansas freeway in July 2020 when Arkansas State trooper Rodney Dunn decided to stop her for allegedly driving 84 in a 70 mph zone. He turned on his lights in an attempt to make her pull over.
Following what she understood to be standard safe procedure in this situation, Harper moved into the right lane, slowed down, turned on her hazards to indicate to the officer that she understood what was going on, and was seeking a safe shoulder or exit to pull over.
No sane person could have imagined, given Harper’s behavior, that she was involved in any active attempt to escape the raw justice of a speeding ticket. Fewer than two or three minutes had passed since the cop first turned on his lights.
Corporal Dunn was having none of that. Using an insanely dangerous strategy that police in Arkansas are using more and more—144 times last year, double the number of times the year before—he slammed into her SUV causing her to hit the concrete median, flipping her SUV. The practice, called the “precision immobilization technique” (PIT), killed at least three people in 2020.”