Pregnant women taking Tylenol to spite Trump

Larniavc said:

The important thing to remember is Trump is wrong. The evidence clearly shows it’s safe.

Future evidence, actual real non-fabricated or AI slop data may show that to be wrong but as of today we can say it’s safe.

My wife had a tough time during her pregnancy and took paracetamol a lot. My son is fine.

RFK is engaging in crankism.

Click to expand...

So safe that pregnant women have literally died from Tylenol overdoses because they wanted to stick it to Trump.

Oompa Loompa said:

So safe that pregnant women have literally died from Tylenol overdoses because they wanted to stick it to Trump.

Click to expand...

Proof of this please.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Proof of this please.

Click to expand...

Too easy.


The liberal reaction, in my opinion, proves that if Trump found a cure for cancer, liberals would protest or deliberately try to get cancer just to "stick it to him." Just imagine what suicide rates would be if he had a press conference to tell the American public that suck starting a 9mm handgun is not healthy.

Oompa Loompa said:

Too easy.

Click to expand...

This?

“I have a friend who’s an ER nurse.”

That your proof?

Why doesn’t the ER nurse post the video herself?

You’re a smart guy Oomp. I think you’re better than to fall for this old nonsense.

Oompa Loompa said:

https://www.perplexity.ai/search/women-dying-from-tylenol-overd-i3wtnLDeRqKXf.8ZJar._g

Click to expand...

GoldenBoy89 said:

Why doesn’t the ER nurse post the video herself?

Click to expand...

She did.

Oompa Loompa said:

She did.

Pregnant Liberal Woman Suffers Fatal Tylenol Overdose After Trying to “Prove Trump Wrong” — Now Allegedly on Ventilator Fighting for Her Life: REPORT | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hᴏft

Nicole Sirotek, founder of American Frontline Nurses, claimed that she received a frantic 4 a.m.

www.thegatewaypundit.com

Click to expand...

Are you serious man?

She doesn’t know patient either!
What gives it away is her over the top diatribe about liberal women. The whole thing reads like it was made for you people to consume.

This is the same social media stupidity we saw surrounding the Covid vaccines.

Why do you guys believe this nonsense?

GoldenBoy89 said:

Why do you guys believe this nonsense?

Click to expand...

Why do you ask for evidence or sources?

Oompa Loompa said:

Why do you ask for evidence or sources?

Click to expand...

FWIW, I haven't heard of any lately, and the reports I've seen are more of the nature of rumor than confirmation. The closest I've found is an increase of women suffering acetaminophen overdose, but it doesn't seem protest related. Nor are the circumstances behind it mentioned.

As mentioned in this thread, once saw a warning on some medication that had me thinking it contained acetaminophen and a check with the pharmacist confirmed it. But my wife was already taking acetaminophen. Had she taken the medicine without stopping acetaminophen, she would have taken too much. OD in the classic sense? Don't know, but it wouldn't have done her liver any good. Is this what is going on with increased instances of overdose? Don't know, but there's a lot of OTC medicine that contain acetaminophen, as well as prescription medicines, and not being aware of it can be dangerous.

A lot of these medicines now have warnings that they contain acetaminophen. I've just taken a bottle of acetaminophen pain reliever out of my desk drawer, and even it has "Contains acetaminophen" on the label. Be that as it may, wouldn't count on a warning label always there, so it pays to check out the ingredients.

Oompa Loompa said:

Why do you ask for evidence or sources?

Click to expand...

Because I know you don’t have it. Rumors, second hand stories and anecdotes being shared on social media aren’t evidence.

Oompa Loompa said:

View attachment 370691

Click to expand...

Do they test any medications on pregnant women? Historically, the FDA hasn’t even required drug trials to include women, which are often excluded because their hormone cycle doesn’t provide clean results. We have to rely on independent studies and reports accumulating data to determine safety. I’m not surprised Tylenol official statements say otherwise for legal reasons.

comana said:

Do they test any medications on pregnant women? Historically, the FDA hasn’t even required drug trials to include women, which are often excluded because their hormone cycle doesn’t provide clean results. We have to rely on independent studies and reports accumulating data to determine safety. I’m not surprised Tylenol official statements say otherwise for legal reasons.

Click to expand...

I just thought it was interesting how Trump basically makes the same recommendation made by the manufacturer and the left goes nuts.

Oompa Loompa said:

I just thought it was interesting how Trump basically makes the same recommendation made by the manufacturer and the left goes nuts.

Click to expand...

He’s not a medical expert and should not be making medical recommendations on anything. This isn’t a political matter- get medical advice from medical professionals not politicians.

comana said:

He’s not a medical expert and should not be making medical recommendations on anything. This isn’t a political matter- get medical advice from medical professionals not politicians.

Click to expand...

It's not a political matter, you're correct.

But people are rightfully skeptical of medical institutions (especially the drug companies) and that skepticism isn't completely unwarranted.


With this particular case, it's not as if they completely pulled this one out of thin air... NIH and Johns Hopkins were barking up the same tree about 5-6 years ago.



The researchers analyzed data from the Boston Birth Cohort, a 20-year study of early life factors influencing pregnancy and child development. They found that children whose cord blood samples contained the highest levels of acetaminophen—the generic name for the drug Tylenol—were roughly three times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD or autism spectrum disorder later in childhood, compared to children with the lowest levels of acetaminophen in their cord blood.

Their findings were published last week in JAMA Psychiatry.

The study, which was authored by Johns Hopkins postdoctoral fellow Yuelong Ji and colleagues, the team measured the biomarkers of acetaminophen and two of its metabolic byproducts in umbilical cord blood samples from 996 individual births.

Compared to the group with the lowest amount of acetaminophen exposure, the children in the middle third group were about 2.26 times more likely to have an ADHD diagnosis and 2.14 times more likely to have an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis. Those with the highest levels of exposure were associated with 2.86 times the risk of ADHD and 3.62 times the risk for autism spectrum disorder, compared to those with the lowest exposure.


So in this particular case, it wasn't even just a simple correlation, it was a linear correlation. (which, alone still isn't 100% proof, but it does strengthen the possibility of a causal relationship)

In this case, they broke the test subjects out into 3 groups (low exposure, medium exposure, high exposure)

The fact that the medium exposure group was 2 times more likely to have a diagnosis later on, and the high exposure group was 3-4 times more likely (compared to the low exposure group) would indicate that it's at least worth looking into.

Just because it's RFK saying it, people should by no means be lumping this in with the "MMR vaccines cause autism" conspiracy theories.

ThatRobGuy said:

.....Just because it's RFK saying it, people should by no means be lumping this in with the "MMR vaccines cause autism" conspiracy theories.

Click to expand...

This is almost tragic: how the mans inherent un-trustworthiness poisons the air around this topic.

durangodawood said:

This is almost tragic: how the mans inherent un-trustworthiness poisons the air around this topic.

Click to expand...

The reason some of his wacky stuff gets embraced to the degree it does (instead of immediately getting laughed out of the room like flat-earther stuff) is because the drug companies have made themselves untrustworthy to a certain degree as well.

We can't necessarily let the drug companies and healthcare establishment off the hook scot free for the role they've played over the last 25 years in making mainstream medicine seem less trustworthy in the eyes of a lot of people.

People tend to look at these things through a lens of "compared to what alternative?"


Unfortunately in this case, the "what" RFK gets compared to are the people who brought us:
"We see no evidence that Oxycontin is habit forming"
"Vioxx is completely safe, and concerns about risk of stroke are overblown"
J&J/Janssen in particular has had numerous scandals over the years... One recent case would be the near billion class action lawsuit they just had to shell out to people in the US & Canada after years of insisting that their talc based baby powder was safe. Apart from the fact that the talc by itself was found by the WHO and FDA to be possibly carcinogenic to humans when used in the genital area on females... they were shipping out batches (as recently as 2019) that were found to have asbestos in them, something they initially denied and publicly tried to attribute to FDA testing facilities making mistakes or being contaminated.


Compared to an honest, transparent, shining corporate stewards, RFK would seem like a complete loon for many of his ideas.

However, when compared to the entity that brought us the biggest addiction epidemic in modern history, "stroke in a bottle", and asbestos-laced powder for baby's nether regions... The raw milk/vitamin A/ivermectin stuff doesn't seem quite as wacky as it should in comparison.