this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
4 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

16908 readers
457 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Can you elaborate on the first paragraph? How is that significant? It seems to agree with what I said.

[–] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago

I didn't say the study wasn't "good" I said its not automatically 100% correct because it's a study. I haven't read it let me look at the first page so I can elaborate.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 0 points 1 week ago

The study is fine. But its ethos is literally just correlation. The abstract:

Acetaminophen is the most commonly used over-the-counter pain and fever medication taken during pregnancy, with > 50% of pregnant women using acetaminophen worldwide. Numerous well-designed studies have indicated that pregnant mothers exposed to acetaminophen have children diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), including autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), at higher rates than children of pregnant mothers who were not exposed to acetaminophen.

This has zero cause effect relationship. Its literally the same issue with the vaccine correlation: medical care access.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Easy to state but do you have any proof of the connection?

How about the results section in abstract of the paper, which mentions "association" six times and "cause" zero times.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

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 state causation, just a vague correlation which RFK Jr is exaggerating.

What other evidence do you want?

[–] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

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.

It was submitted in May so he may have been tipped off about it because that's kind of his special autistic focus ironically.

[–] snooggums@piefed.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It was submitted in May so he may have been tipped off about it because that's kind of his special autistic focus ironically.

Submitted the month after he announced he would have an answer in September.

RFK Jr said he wouldn't undermine vaccines during his confirmation hearing and then did exactly that ever since. He lies about everything.

Why are you still giving these lying fucks any benefit of the doubt?

[–] Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 week ago

Sorry about asking for fucking proof of your claims. I guess we just rely on vibes to judge truthiness.