Public health had little to no apparent interest in autism or chronic disease prior to this administration, even as affairs got demonstrably worse over decades. Now attention is being paid to it and the complaint is "you're doing it wrong." Are you quite sure which of these scenarios is the bad one?
1 week ago | 71
Yeah. Compare it to the evidence from the other side. It may be not vaccines, but something is killing us. We need to know what. I’d say it is our unwillingness to explore non commercial options. Today, if there was a cure for C19 that would be natural, would we discover it? Indulge me with a ridiculous idea; what if starring 30 minutes at the full moon would cure cancer, would we discover and promote such solution? I am not saying it does, but what if it did. What if there is some solution that is free of charge? Would we discover it? Like; what is the healthy vitamin D concentration in blood? What is C19 correlation with vitamin D? Nobody pays for such research. Do vaccines really save from desease, or only from one particular virus, but the illness will come with an other one? Do we know that?
1 week ago | 14
Big corporations only have your best interests at heart.
1 week ago | 31
Has Unherd done a systematic review of the evidence? If so, please publish it.
1 week ago | 25
Never heard RFK Jr. stating Tylenol caused autism...is this an unbiased response or a hit piece...?
1 week ago | 11
I remember similar mud being slung early COVID days... By the same organisations... Let's give it a couple of years. Bringing the taboo subjects to the front always stirs strong emotions... time will bare all.
1 week ago | 48
If I remember, didn’t the drug tweet themselves that it is not advised for pregnant women? What is this magazine on about?
1 week ago | 22
The unherd psuedo geniuses should explain why apparently nothing caused the autism epidemic
1 week ago (edited) | 58
You did so much research but couldn't buy a box of Tylenol?!? The little paper in the box tells you that the manufacturer warns pregnant women to use Tylenol. And only this is what the Trump Administration said, pregnant woman should not take it. By the way, the manufacturer warns since 2017! Journalism 2025...
1 week ago | 12
the evidence that covid vaccines help in any way with covid is also strikingly thin
1 week ago | 9
Acetaminophen causes a glutathione dump in your body to break it down. Glutathione is needed for detoxing. It is perfectly plausible that this is a potential cause of autism in certain populations who do not have effective detox pathways already in addition to lower glutathione levels caused by ingesting acetaminophen. Tylenol consumption is only one potential cause, not the only cause. That is all they are saying.
1 week ago (edited) | 2
It has been extremely difficult, near impossible, to take the existing data around the globe to find the truth about the jabs, given that the data was corrupted due to the way the vaccination status was recorded. In most western countries your vaccinated status only transpired after 14 to 21 days post any of your jabs. Many Covid cases and adverse effects happened in these windows. So the unvaccinated group was lumped with all of these. The powers that be made sure that the fear they wanted to convey was put into the data. Sorcery it was. We should be focusing on studying the countries that were highly vaccinated vs those that were not. Looking at mortality and disease prevalence since the introduction of the vaccine. The vaccine producers in their trials got rid of the placebo group as quickly as possible even though they received the EUA approval based on them agreeing to do longer term studies and observation. Witchcraft.
1 week ago (edited) | 4
The question is if there is any validity to the claim. Given that J&J said not to take Tylenol during pregnancy and given that correlation may not equal causation but it never contra-indicates causation, is there a statistically significant risk? The answer can only either be "we don't know" or "yes", it cannot be "no". So explain the pearl clutching, please. The headline of this article indicates that you are avoiding the only important question.
1 week ago | 1
Why can’t people come to terms with the fact that people putting off having babies in their late 40s is causing a lot of problems that nobody will admit. Instead let’s blame Tylenol.
1 week ago | 3
Nowhere is the word “causal” or anything approaching it used in their assessment.
1 week ago | 1
“Strikingly thin”, but is it wrong? Correlation into causation - there’s a test for that, Bradford Hill. Does it meet that criteria?
1 week ago | 21
As it is for all vaccination ..why are people against finding out the truth and giving some parents some hope ???
1 week ago | 6
This was a HARVARD meta analysis. Now, im all for calling out lazy research at leftist institutions, but lets not pretend that trump and rfk did research, or that their teams did or something. No one did. It was a meta ANALYSIS. Done, again, by HARVARD. So, ok, lets stop giving them tax money. Works for me.
1 week ago (edited) | 18
UnHerd
'The review was plagued by non-sequiturs. It cited weak evidence as if it were strong. The authors failed to quantitatively synthesise the findings of the studies they referenced. Worse, they botched the table entries and even cited studies in ways directly contradicted by the studies themselves. The review was lazy, but it ostensibly supports what some people really want to believe: that Tylenol causes autism.'
Read the full article here: unherd.com/newsroom/rfks-autism-report-twists-corr…
1 week ago | [YT] | 80