Tylenol maker Kenvue denies the connection allegedly made in the report, which is expected to be published by the Department of Health and Human Services this month.
Here’s a few, not sure if they’re peer-reviewed but one is a meta-analysis. Important to note which journals these are published in, since less reputable journals will happily publish a lawsuit-seeking falsified study in exchange for money.
In conclusion, on the basis of these studies, only weak associations between paracetamol exposure and neurodevelopmental issues have been identified, and no causal link can be inferred.
Acetaminophen use during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk for ADHD, ASD, and hyperactivity symptoms. These findings are concerning; however, results should be interpreted with caution given that the available evidence consists of observational studies and is susceptible to several potential sources of bias.
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Cord biomarkers of fetal exposure to acetaminophen were associated with significantly increased risk of childhood ADHD and ASD in a dose-response fashion. Our findings support previous studies regarding the association between prenatal and perinatal acetaminophen exposure and childhood neurodevelopmental risk and warrant additional investigations.
Our analyses using the Navigation Guide thus support evidence consistent with an association between acetaminophen exposure during pregnancy and increased incidence of NDDs. Appropriate and immediate steps should be taken to advise pregnant women to limit acetaminophen consumption to protect their offspring’s neurodevelopment.
The problem with these studies is they are difficult to publish with negative data, and then meta analysis is done on a biased dataset.
There are many countries that avoid all analgesics because they have better health care professionals who acknowledge the fact that these drugs are the main reason for liver damage. But, USA is always isoated in their analysis.
The sum of those studies is effectively little to nothing. We all know that correlation is not causation and these correlations are weak and logically problematic.
Instead, take a look at this one, which not only hypothesizes a cause, but used that hypothesis to form a treatment that worked so well it seemed almost miraculous.
This is the problem with access to papers on the internet to non-scientist.
Epidemiology is a weak science, with correlations only, and huge amounts of hand waiving that is almost always wrong.
Note that this shit study did not ask why the mothers were taking acetominophen. Sample size is very low. No actual mechanism was even looked at. We piss away so much money on these studies, and if the data is negative, it is very difficult to publish, so they p-hack the data to see an effect, for more papers, for more funding.
Here’s the problem with this stupid hypothesis:
In 1982, seven people were killed from tainted tylenol bottles in Chicago, this led to an immediate halt of use nationwide and the recall of 31 million bottles. Tylenol sales dipped for YEARS. Less autism? NO.
Also, while North Americans eat these pills like candy for any stupid reason, many countries, like Germany, Switzerland and Austria avoid them because of liver toxicity. No difference in autism rates.
Here’s a few, not sure if they’re peer-reviewed but one is a meta-analysis. Important to note which journals these are published in, since less reputable journals will happily publish a lawsuit-seeking falsified study in exchange for money.
Anyway I haven’t read these, here you go:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6138494/
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article-abstract/187/8/1817/4980325
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6822099/
Okay yeah now I’m concerned.
Three weeks ago (interesting timing), meta study:
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-025-01208-0
The problem with these studies is they are difficult to publish with negative data, and then meta analysis is done on a biased dataset.
There are many countries that avoid all analgesics because they have better health care professionals who acknowledge the fact that these drugs are the main reason for liver damage. But, USA is always isoated in their analysis.
The sum of those studies is effectively little to nothing. We all know that correlation is not causation and these correlations are weak and logically problematic.
Instead, take a look at this one, which not only hypothesizes a cause, but used that hypothesis to form a treatment that worked so well it seemed almost miraculous.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5497533/
moar https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10626700/
This is the problem with access to papers on the internet to non-scientist. Epidemiology is a weak science, with correlations only, and huge amounts of hand waiving that is almost always wrong.
Note that this shit study did not ask why the mothers were taking acetominophen. Sample size is very low. No actual mechanism was even looked at. We piss away so much money on these studies, and if the data is negative, it is very difficult to publish, so they p-hack the data to see an effect, for more papers, for more funding.
Here’s the problem with this stupid hypothesis:
In 1982, seven people were killed from tainted tylenol bottles in Chicago, this led to an immediate halt of use nationwide and the recall of 31 million bottles. Tylenol sales dipped for YEARS. Less autism? NO.
Also, while North Americans eat these pills like candy for any stupid reason, many countries, like Germany, Switzerland and Austria avoid them because of liver toxicity. No difference in autism rates.
What? No paracetamol in Germany? It’s over the counter.