This is your best time post I have read so far. It is well organized and introduced the topic well. Generally, I have found your time posts hard to follow.
You mention on Twitter that Trump has been deregulating biotech. Do you / will you follow up with an article explaining how much he has done and what the impact will be? Sort of to balance out your (valid) critique here.
I have nothing to worry about I am not a pregnant woman who has been told by her government that taking Tylenol while dealing with the pains of pregnancy is a concern, I’m just watching the downfall
Sometimes acetaminophen (paracetamol) isn't the answer to pain during pregnancy.
My wife's liver fails (soon after conception). Her first pregnancy was extremely uncomfortable. Her GP prescribed heavy doses of acetaminophen (paracetamol). It was only when she ended up in hospital with an early "hind water leak" that she was seen by a Ob/gyn who diagnosed her liver failure with 3 questions as she strode in to the room.
Through subsequent pregnancies she took an experimental (at the time) drug (a chelating agent, I presume) that was transformative.
I'm glad Trump was elected. But good grief does he propose and implement a lot of retardation himself. Electing a president feels like just electing the lesser of two catastrophes, but catastrophes are guaranteed to happen either way.
Sheesh... why is it so hard to get good data and science? This is depressing. It seems to be one extreme or the other: either we get an insane authoritarian COVID regime run by liars who get a presidential pardon for "offenses against the United States," or pointless home remedies that have nothing to do with anything, don't solve the problem, and are basically a repeat of silly 19th Century claims like "diseases are caused by bad air."
You seem to have something personal at stake here and to be behaving irrationally. No one considers data collected from retroactive interviews reliable, and the prescription database is obviously irrelevant because Tylenol is an OTC medication. I stopped reading after that because you’re obviously not being reasonable.
I have nothing personal at stake, nor have I said anything irrational.
You should read before making comments like this. The prenatal interviews where the interviews took place are effectively just gathering cohort data, making them minimally retrospective. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of women's usage of acetaminophen (paracetamol) in Sweden is by prescription: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcpt.13003
You are not being reasonable and you have failed to do the requisite background research to make adequate criticisms.
That’s a good thing, because people’s biased personal recollections and submission of potential post hoc ergo propter hoc evidence should not be considered to be of the caliber of real scientific evidence. We should not believe all women when it comes to these sorts of claims, especially since we know they’re false.
Don't troll the comments section. Unverifiable and self-interested reports about vaccine injury are not like neutral and verifiable reports about current and recent use of acetaminophen.
A simple method with the available data is to compare between reports and the Prescribed Drug Register. If you want to verify these reports yourself, you can just ask women to bring in the boxes for drugs they're using and trust that they're not lying about using.
If you make another baseless allegation or say anything else that's clearly dumb, then you'll receive a ban.
This is your best time post I have read so far. It is well organized and introduced the topic well. Generally, I have found your time posts hard to follow.
You mention on Twitter that Trump has been deregulating biotech. Do you / will you follow up with an article explaining how much he has done and what the impact will be? Sort of to balance out your (valid) critique here.
Sure, but likely only come December.
Americans deserve what they get from the admin they wanted
Praying for you
I have nothing to worry about I am not a pregnant woman who has been told by her government that taking Tylenol while dealing with the pains of pregnancy is a concern, I’m just watching the downfall
Because it causes autism?
Here’s a study showing that Tylenol “reduces positive empathy” in adults. But that’s fine for fetuses I guess.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6455058/
🤔
It sure is
Pain is a normal part of life, friend. Why take Tylenol and not OxyContin?
why not
Sometimes acetaminophen (paracetamol) isn't the answer to pain during pregnancy.
My wife's liver fails (soon after conception). Her first pregnancy was extremely uncomfortable. Her GP prescribed heavy doses of acetaminophen (paracetamol). It was only when she ended up in hospital with an early "hind water leak" that she was seen by a Ob/gyn who diagnosed her liver failure with 3 questions as she strode in to the room.
Through subsequent pregnancies she took an experimental (at the time) drug (a chelating agent, I presume) that was transformative.
Lol, You’re A BAPnigger. You Run Cover For The 764 Child Sextortion Cult.
I'm glad Trump was elected. But good grief does he propose and implement a lot of retardation himself. Electing a president feels like just electing the lesser of two catastrophes, but catastrophes are guaranteed to happen either way.
Sheesh... why is it so hard to get good data and science? This is depressing. It seems to be one extreme or the other: either we get an insane authoritarian COVID regime run by liars who get a presidential pardon for "offenses against the United States," or pointless home remedies that have nothing to do with anything, don't solve the problem, and are basically a repeat of silly 19th Century claims like "diseases are caused by bad air."
You seem to have something personal at stake here and to be behaving irrationally. No one considers data collected from retroactive interviews reliable, and the prescription database is obviously irrelevant because Tylenol is an OTC medication. I stopped reading after that because you’re obviously not being reasonable.
I have nothing personal at stake, nor have I said anything irrational.
You should read before making comments like this. The prenatal interviews where the interviews took place are effectively just gathering cohort data, making them minimally retrospective. Moreover, the overwhelming majority of women's usage of acetaminophen (paracetamol) in Sweden is by prescription: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcpt.13003
You are not being reasonable and you have failed to do the requisite background research to make adequate criticisms.
That’s a good thing, because people’s biased personal recollections and submission of potential post hoc ergo propter hoc evidence should not be considered to be of the caliber of real scientific evidence. We should not believe all women when it comes to these sorts of claims, especially since we know they’re false.
Don't troll the comments section. Unverifiable and self-interested reports about vaccine injury are not like neutral and verifiable reports about current and recent use of acetaminophen.
They aren’t verifiable. How were they verified?
You have an axe to grind against populists and/or you’re sensitive about autism for… reasons.
A simple method with the available data is to compare between reports and the Prescribed Drug Register. If you want to verify these reports yourself, you can just ask women to bring in the boxes for drugs they're using and trust that they're not lying about using.
If you make another baseless allegation or say anything else that's clearly dumb, then you'll receive a ban.
He’s A BAPNigger.