Not to defend RFK, but this argument is dumb.
People from everywhere it doesn't natively grow developed cancer long before they had access to tobacco. That doesn't prove tobacco use doesn't cause cancer, it just means it isn't the only potential cause.
That's because cancer is a category of diseases, not a single one. Specific types of cancer that are caused by smoking are caused by smoking (there is afaik 12 of those, and some are associated with prolonged inhalation of any smoke, and some are only tabaco-related, but it doesn't matter)
The point is, the claim is that Tylenol is "linked to" autism.
This post is rebutting the claim that Tylenol "causes" autism.
Thats a classic straw man argument.
No, the post is claiming that because Tylenol was discovered after autism, it can't be a cause of it. That's flawed logic: it's true that autism must also have some other cause, but it's very possible in principle for things to have multiple causes, so the timeline argument proves nothing.
That's not to say that Dipshit McBrainworm's claim has any sort of merit whatsoever, mind you. It's just that this argument is defective.
the timeline argument proves nothing
That's what I said ?
If there is a bump in cases of autism post-Tylenol, then it might be a cause, if there isn't, it can't be. That's the reason for the timeline argument, that's what it proves.
"Linked to" means "might cause in some cases". If it's "linked" then it should be at least correlated. The disconnect between the two shows that it isn't.
Are there any cancers that were found to be "caused by smoking" before 2003?
Of those, are there any that have subsequently also been found to be "caused by" vaping (such as the tobacco-related ones)?
If so, then it means vaping is indeed a cause (as opposed to the singular cause) of those cancers even though they were around before vaping was invented (in 2003).
That's why this meme is bad.
If you focus on nicotine specifically, nicotine causes specific type of cancer. Change in the delivery mechanism would cause fluctuations in dosage, but it doesn't matter in this case (we ignore other types of cancer not to bog down the analogy).
If one would argue that Tylenol causes autism, two things should be shown, the delivery mechanism of Tylenol before it was invented/isolated, to explain pre-Tylenol cases of autism, and/or specific uptick in autism when it was started to be used as medication.
It's possible that the meme is good you just didn't get it.
Or that Tylenol is able to aggravate a pathway that results in development of autism. This would move it from "Tylenol causes autism" to "maternal use of Tylenol may be a trigger for development of autism in utero". The latter statement would also require providing compelling that autism (or a condition currently indistinguishable from it) is either not genetic as currently suspected or is like schizophrenia in requiring both a genetic predisposition and a "trigger".
Now, that's quite a bit to have to prove and there's no way in hell RFK Jr of all people managed to figure it out in 6 fucking months. So yeah if China or the EU starts saying this maybe it's worth considering the possibility, otherwise it's just another unsubstantiated claim that unfortunately means pregnant people are going to be recommended it's not worth risking
Also I'm pretty sure paracetamol has been around for about 150 years or more.
it's a bad argument, but the people claiming that Tylenol causes autism aren't using logic to make their claim either.
There's no time or resources in the world to debunk all the bullshit this people generate. Every day, all the time...
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2817406
Findings In this population-based study, models without sibling controls identified marginally increased risks of autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) associated with acetaminophen use during pregnancy. However, analyses of matched full sibling pairs found no evidence of increased risk of autism (hazard ratio, 0.98), ADHD (hazard ratio, 0.98), or intellectual disability (hazard ratio, 1.01) associated with acetaminophen use.
I can't wait to post this on social media. No one is going to respond and actually read a medical journal article but Bravo for this. Very interesting and telling. These people will take anything and run with it hardcore for an agenda my god lol
Worm brain
Looks like those elite bastards are going to make some good old creaky stock market money off of their Tylenol lies.
TL;DR they want Autistic people to go without pain killers.
and pregnant women ☝😃 ibuprofen is not allowed during the last trimester making tylenol the usual painkiller of choice
TIL
tfw my wife has a paracetamol allergy and I will never have autistic kids
😔
Oh he also recently ate thermal paper/reciept because it was healthy on an article today. hes also associated epstein too.
Uh, this is a logical fallacy though :(
Mr Brainworms
Tylenol is a brand. Acetominophen was created in 1878 (or 1852, depending on who you ask).
e: That doesn't make RFKJr not wrong and insane, in case it needed saying.
puts on logic glasses
Oh look, another brilliant mind discovered that autism was identified before Tylenol existed, so obviously Tylenol can't cause autism. That's like saying cancer existed before radiation therapy, therefore radiation can't cause cancer. Peak necessity/sufficiency confusion right here - apparently conditions can only have one cause and medical recognition equals temporal origin.
But hey, let's ignore that Swedish study of 2.5 million kids that found zero causal link when they actually controlled for confounding variables using sibling comparisons. Or those other high-quality studies that show the association completely disappears once you account for genetics and family environment. Who needs actual science when you have timeline gotchas?
Meanwhile pregnant women might avoid the safest pain reliever available because some politician decided to manufacture outrage for political points. But at least someone gets to feel intellectually superior about their logical fallacy meme.
🐱
Meanwhile pregnant women might avoid the safest pain reliever available
More importantly, the safest fever-reducer available. Fevers are actually known to be damaging to fetuses, unlike acetaminophen.
Paracetamol was first made in the 1800's though.
Or are they just blaming a certain brand?
Direct from Wikipedia
Paracetamol was first made in 1878 by Harmon Northrop Morse or possibly in 1852 by Charles Frédéric Gerhardt.
The left has misinformation too. Science is on our side; there’s no reason to propagate this shit.
Listen I know the RFK claim is nonsense but that doesn't excuse faulty logic. This is like saying cancer existed before X so X can't be a carcinogen.
There are many countries worldwide that use a fraction of this drug compared to the US. Americans eat them like candy. Regardless, there is no difference in incidence of autism.
Careful! Cancer was around before cigarettes or dioxin. Not that I don't think RFK is full of shit, but sometimes it's best to ignore bad arguments when there are so many good ones to be made.
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
