this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
752 points (98.5% liked)

Not The Onion

18694 readers
2052 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing Johnson and Johnson, accusing the pharmaceutical company of failing to warn consumers about the risk of taking Tylenol while pregnant.

This lawsuit, the first of its kind from a state government, comes a month after President Donald Trump and U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. announced updated guidance discouraging pregnant women from taking acetaminophen, citing it as a possible cause of autism. The announcement set off a wave of controversy in the health care community, and confusion among pregnant women unsure how they should manage fever and pain during pregnancy.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 6 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (9 children)

Corelation is not causation. What a stupid country I was born to

[–] linkshandig@lemmy.today 10 points 4 weeks ago (8 children)

It’s not even correlation, it’s just made up bullshit

[–] kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 5 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (6 children)

Iirc, this idea comes from a study that found people who used Tylenol while pregnant actually did have a slightly heightened chance of birthing an autistic child. However, that study did not in any way address why this was the case, so incurious fools take it at face value and never examine things any further than that.

This means that there is some very small degree of corelation, even if that corelation has failed to hold water when put to later tests. One of the many, many things that these idiots refuse to look in the eye is that this data point is a singular, contextless point that has way more evidence against than there is for.

I hear where you're coming from, but this one wasn't ripped out of thin air, making it that much more annoying to talk these people out of. So it's not just made up bullshit, but that is still about 99.99% of it.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 2 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Was this the same study that showed a potential link between certain viral infections and autism?

[–] kelpie_returns@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

I haven't heard that one before. No idea tbqh

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)