Comment on it's just science, i guess
Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
I hate the guy as much as anybody but it is a real study.
A real study funded by the agencies headed by RFK Jr finding vague correlation with taking pain medications worded consistently as 'may cause' and with caveats that women should consult their doctor.
This past spring RFK Jr said he would have an answer in September because he set up this study to conclude in August. This is absolute bullshit.
Easy to state but do you have any proof of the connection? I’ve seen refutations of the study claiming the connection was merely the previously understood connection between the age of the mother and autism risk, but that’s just random internet comments.
What you’re claiming is something much more sinister than a mere mistake.
I already mentioned the funding and how it conveniently has findings that are aligned with the answer that RFK Jr wanted in the time frame he was looking for. It doesn't even staye causation, just a vague correlation which RFK Jr is exaggerating.
What other evidence do you want?
Some kind of connection between the authors of the study and RFK Jr. Lots of studies get lots of funding from lots of different places so the source of the funding is not exactly a smoking gun.
Easy to state but do you have any proof of the connection?
How about the abstract of the paper, which mentions “association” three times and “cause” zero times.
The claim is direct funding from RFK Jr. And a deliberate end goal of the study for his purposes. Not that the study is good or bad but that it is a nefarious plot by RFK Jr.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 21 hours ago
Yes and there are also “real studies” that say smoking is healthy.
Just because there’s words formatted a certain way in a PDF doesn’t mean it has any merit.
Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 21 hours ago
I added it in to my previous response but I figure I’ll just do it as a reply. The study was submitted in May so he very well may have seen it come up in his autism alerts. I’m sure he has some kind of autism study feed.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 20 hours ago
Can you elaborate on the first paragraph? How is that significant? It seems to agree with what I said.
Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 20 hours ago
My mistake I thought it was a reply in the other comment thread.
The thing that makes it possibly a good study is that it was published in a good journal from a good school. It’s not Harry Wang’s Big Book of Science. You expect poorly done research in pay to play journals, but less so in biomedcentral.
I’m still mildly skeptical and have seen people make the claim that it was more likely the age of the mother which has been legitimately associated with higher risks of autism. It makes sense. But having now seen that they’re pushing this shit super hard I’m immediately on guard.
I hadn’t seen the Trump TV announcement of this dumb shit. This is something worthy of further study not a doctor’s recommendation.