Harvard and Yale, the two places they are stripping government research funding from. But in this instance they important
Maxwell's father was Mossad. You are the one trolling. Your logic is to believe the FBI. You can't be serious. Patel last week said there was no victims. Why should anyone trust the FBI?
Also if you want people to take your medical advice seriously leave RFK Jr at home. The guy is literally a self-admitted heroin addict, proud of it even. No one should ever take medical advice from him
No one believes it. Therefore the alleged gun is not the gun. Therefore the alleged shooter is not the shooter. Which makes sense because there is zero evidence to date showing a shooter taking a shot from the roof they claim.
It’s not a Harvard study, it’s a Mount Sinai study summarized by Harvard. Good job reading - not a forte of yours. He’s a self admitted heroin addict from the late 1960’s through maybe the early 1980’s. That means he can’t be good at his job in 2025? What a dumb grouping of things to conflate. I guess any alcoholic or drug addict that beats the addiction is automatically a piece of shit for the rest of their lives. Well I’m not going to believe that given your lack of reading about your false one sentence autism claim.
uhh yeah the fact that he talks about how good heroin was for him definitely means he has no credibility on medical issues. do you have kids? I do. If I found out my kids’ doctor was a proud heroin addict I’d drop that fucker so fast. This is real life stuff, raising kids, not just internet trolling. I can’t even believe this is a real discussion. Just goes to show how far this White House circus has lowered the bar
So, then you’re saying that it’s definitive that Tylenol causes autism, or is it a fact that a simple search will find articles that lead to an inconclusive result? Also, the symptoms of autism were apparent long before Tylenol…: just because they reclassified it in the 60s as its own thing, doesn’t mean that it wasn’t there long before Tylenol .
If you found how that they were a heroin addict 40 years ago and not since, you’d drop them? I’ve come to realize this is just about crying about Trump for you guys and not actual discourse. I try to bring meaningful discussion here to people who disagree and it’s just called trolling or met with snide remarks a high school girl would make. Not sure where I ever said it’s the definitive link. Can you show me where I said that? It existed before acetaminophen but was incredibly rare compared to the numbers we see it today. Honest questions - do you think something humans are doing are causing the dramatic spike specifically over the past 30 or so years? Do you think it’s simply circumstantial? Maybe it’s screen time. Maybe it’s ultra processed foods. Maybe it’s just morphed genetics. Maybe it’s something the pharmaceutical companies are doing. I’m not sure but I’m happy someone is trying to get to the root cause of it being someone that believes there is a human causation at work here.
yes I would never let a doctor treat my child if he’s a proponent of heroin. For fucks sake that’s not even an extreme take. Also RFK Jr has no medical training or experience. So it’s even worse than my example. He’s literally just a politician and a druggie. Why should I take medical advice for my children from him
Oh, I’m not in disagreement about any of that at all. I don’t eat sandwich meats, and barely anything packaged anymore because at 50 I’m terrified of colon cancer . Population is also much bigger, which alone could lead to more diagnoses. Also, more studies and subjects. Many things were just assumed to be psychiatric in nature along ago. That why there were places like pilgrim state , because they just herded people to those places for everything . But , population increase also leads to sustaining through more synthetic practices . I am 100 percent in agreement that is what’s killing us. But I’m not gonna hold a conference blaming one brand , with such limited evidence… seems like just an idea . He himself yesterday said the other guy was smartly staying quiet, but he just doesn’t do that
The population size has nothing to do with an increase in percentage so I don’t really know what that means? Autism has increased a function of percentage of the population, whatever it is as compared to years ago. I can buy the argument it was diagnosed less or is maybe over-diagnosed these days. I agree in some cases especially with the evolution and main stream realization that mental health issues exist.
Back in the day you got autism and you were just called “slow”, which was a lot of people so it might not even be on the rise RFK Jr has a great example of this in his own family. His poor aunt was a little slow, a little agitated. They shipped her away to an institution and gave her a fucking lobotomy. She probably just had a form of autism. Just awful
While the term autism may have been used for other mental issues not actually related to what is now considered "autism", it doesn't take away that Kanner and Asperger were studying autistic children in the 1940s, well before Tylenol was around. I'd guess the reason for the enormous increase in cases is, in the 50's thru the mid 80's they were just trying to figure out what it was. Parents would just say their kids were difficult or different but they wouldn't get them into a doctor to check on that. It's the last 35 years or so that kids started getting diagnosed with autism, and every year they are coming up with new ways to diagnose more. Of course you also have the people gaming the system, getting their doctor to say the kids are autistic so they can get disability money. It's not a large number of people but it adds to it. https://www.kennedykrieger.org/stor...ronment at school interfering with learning** Of course I agree they need to bring the numbers down but I still think there will be increasing numbers at least for a few more years as the diagnostic criteria is expanded.
Yup. And it’s also hard, because a lot of times a diagnosis still to this day uses terms like on the spectrum. It’s still broad. Which makes that announcement yesterday even more ill advised
they couldn’t even get the name right yesterday Like a making a major announcement that drinking coors light is bad for you instead of beer. What a breakthrough
So you think if a population size increases, the percentage of folks with a certain affliction automatically increases? That certainly could be true for some things, but to act like that’s an automatic conclusion isn’t really how statistics work.
It does when the diagnosis gets narrowed down, when it was being lumped in with metal illness etc before… sometimes more cases leads to more studies , and finally finding out that something was being mislabeled previously. Maybe wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t happening to more people as time goes on I don’t think there are any automatic conclusions , I just think there are factors
