• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

RFK Jr., HHS to Link Autism to Tylenol Use in Pregnancy and Folate Deficiencies

MAGAnificent said:
You are doubling down on a dumb claim. I take medical advice from my doctors. However, I agree with Trump in many aspects. Is that so hard for a librul like yourself to understand?
Click to expand...

librul?


What is that in real world terms?

MAGAnificent said:
You are twisting yourself in knots in very partisan fashion just like Harris did. The context is in what I highlighted. "But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I’m not taking it.” That is in effect saying that if Trump told her she should take it, she would refuse to take it. I think if you try real hard, you can probably work out that Trump certainly would have told everyone that they should take the vaccines. After all if was his Operation Warp Speed that made them available in record time. She was playing politics with a vaccine that the left now insists saved millions of lives. Very irresponsible.
Click to expand...

You outed yourself.....
 
MAGAnificent said:
At best, you are a left leaning libertarian. You seem to side with the left on most issues that are discussed.
Click to expand...

Then you are massively ignorant on my stance in regards to police, the family, military, taxation, social restructuring, etc.

Hint - Libertarian - Right =/= "librul"
 
Fledermaus said:
Then you are massively ignorant on my stance in regards to police, the family, military, taxation, social restructuring, etc.
Click to expand...
May I ask who you voted for in the 2016, 2020, and 2024 presidential elections? If you voted democrat in either of them, you are certainly not conservative.
 
Schweddy said:
No need and thanks for not putting in the extra effort.

My argument isn't about how well the vax works. My argument is that is impossible to claim it saved a specific amount of lives (4 billion was the statement).
To claim that would be tantamount to a religious statement.
Click to expand...
Thanks for looking at the JAMA reference, which LITERALLY goes over the scientific methodology to show how many lives are saved by the vaccine.

This shows it’s not impossible to estimate at all, and is solid enough data to publish in a major medical journal. But maybe you think JAMA is a religious tract?
 
Hello My Son said:
Could you elaborate on what exactly you’re referencing? I’d generally agree, but meta-analyses of large datasets has actually been going on within computer algorithmic processes for decades at this point. AI will simply take it to a much more advanced level.
Click to expand...
Well in all meta analysis there is a criteria by which studies are added into the study or rejected.
In a meta analysis done by a human in a peer reviewed paper, that criteria would be known.

If it’s ai generated you won’t know the criteria it uses .
So say you wanted a meta analysis on studies for a certain vaccine efficacy .
The person controlling the code for ai could influence tge criteria such to reject studies showing strong efficacy and thereby skew the results of the meta analysis.

More insidious is that Ai is built to learn , and that may introduce bias as the ai say “ learns” that meta analysis that results in a certain outcome gets more views and is referenced more and therefore the ai is more likely to produce a biased study that’s “ more popular”.
 
Threegoofs said:
Thanks for looking at the JAMA reference, which LITERALLY goes over the scientific methodology to show how many lives are saved by the vaccine.

This shows it’s not impossible to estimate at all, and is solid enough data to publish in a major medical journal. But maybe you think JAMA is a religious tract?
Click to expand...
I remember that study and it was linked on the forum when it came out.

It showed that only 60yrs+ individuals needed the jab.
It also had extremely loose sensitivity values, assumptions were very high and proved that comorbidities played a significant role in deaths.
 
Schweddy said:
I remember that study and it was linked on the forum when it came out.

It showed that only 60yrs+ individuals needed the jab.
It also had extremely loose sensitivity values, assumptions were very high and proved that comorbidities played a significant role in deaths.
Click to expand...
WTF does any of that have to do with your assertion that you can’t estimate deaths avoided?
 
Schweddy said:
My point is that people are getting up in a tizzy about a damn warning label.
Click to expand...
It is more than about a label. Dr. Trump and Dr. Kennedy do not want pregnant women or small children to take Tylenol at all. I am not opposed to putting on warnings, but they must be done in good faith and based on careful examination. Dr T and Dr K have not done that. They manipulate data in order to get the results they want. I don’t think putting an autism warming on Tylenol makes much sense. There is no evidence of a common event. The authors of the Harvard study have come out and said that the Trump Administration inaccurately reported on their findings.
 
Threegoofs said:
WTF does any of that have to do with your assertion that you can’t estimate deaths avoided?
Click to expand...
Well I guess you "can" estimate deaths, but to believe what they put in that study would be religious esp with the assumptions made.
 
BrotherFease said:
It is more than about a label. Dr. Trump and Dr. Kennedy do not want pregnant women or small children to take Tylenol at all. I am not opposed to putting on warnings, but they must be done in good faith and based on careful examination. Dr T and Dr K have not done that.
Click to expand...
But, it's not really when you take away the political BS.
They have been studying this issue with Tylenol for decades. There are studies that show no significance and studies that show significance.

BrotherFease said:
There is no evidence of a common event. The authors of the Harvard study have come out and said that the Trump Administration inaccurately reported on their findings.
Click to expand...
If no evidence, then by all means take Tylenol. To ignore it completely because TRUMP is absurd. That really all this bitching is about.

Let's take the latest study, it's only a 13% chance at very best based on perfect situation after 16 weeks etc..

Psst... I asked my wife not to take Tylenol when she was pregs with my daughter because I had heard of the studies. She is 16 now.
This isn't new.

Why chance it?
 
Schweddy said:
But, it's not really when you take away the political BS.
They have been studying this issue with Tylenol for decades. There are studies that show no significance and studies that show significance.


If no evidence, then by all means take Tylenol. To ignore it completely because TRUMP is absurd. That really all this bitching is about.

Let's take the latest study, it's only a 13% chance at very best based on perfect situation after 16 weeks etc..

Psst... I asked my wife not to take Tylenol when she was pregs with my daughter because I had heard of the studies. She is 16 now.
This isn't new.

Why chance it?
Click to expand...
Why chance it?

High fevers, for one thing.

As for "chancing it": Temple Grandin was born before Tylenol was available.
 
Schweddy said:
Well I guess you "can" estimate deaths, but to believe what they put in that study would be religious esp with the assumptions made.
Click to expand...
Your beliefs (aka religion) are an order of magnitude behind the science… which has been done many times.
 
Pyrite said:
Why chance it?

High fevers, for one thing.

As for "chancing it": Temple Grandin was born before Tylenol was available.
Click to expand...
www.nytimes.com

The Politics of ‘Tough It Out’

His advice on Tylenol has steered President Trump into the politics of pregnancy.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

In attacking the use of acetaminophen during pregnancy on Monday, President Trump and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. cited unproven claims that the drug is linked to autism, while glossing over well-documented risks posed by fevers, which pregnant women often use acetaminophen to treat.

Mr. Trump said that acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, might be justified if a pregnant woman had a severe fever. But he suggested that the bar should be extremely high, and at several other points declared, “Don’t take Tylenol,” with no qualification. “Fight like hell not to take it,” he said, warning that if someone did take it, “That, you’ll have to work out with yourself.” Repeatedly, he insisted there was “no downside” to avoiding it.

But there is a downside: the risks of the fevers that acetaminophen can treat. It is the only drug that obstetricians commonly recommend to combat pain or fever during pregnancy, because options like ibuprofen can harm the fetus.

Decades of studies have shown a clear association between fevers early in pregnancy and a specific set of birth defects, including neural tube defects, some heart defects and cleft palates, said Dr. Eric Benner, a neonatologist at Duke University. “The evidence is really strong,” he said.

Dr. Benner emphasized that most of the time, the children of women who have fevers will be fine; these birth defects are rare. But research has consistently found an increased risk.

If pregnant women are scared away from acetaminophen, “you run the risk of seeing increased incidence of those types of birth defects potentially for nothing,” he said.

There are also indications that fevers later in pregnancy may be linked to preterm birth. That is less strongly established than the link to birth defects, but there is an “increasing body of evidence” for it, said Dr. Scott Sullivan, the director of maternal-fetal medicine at Inova Health. That evidence fits with studies showing that heat in general, including from heat waves, may increase the risk of preterm birth, he added....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom