The headline makes it sound as though human beings cannot be trusted with information. We'll only get confused or descend into shame.
What's the issue here?
On Thursday, Kennedy, the secretary of health and human services, said in a cabinet meeting, “There’s two studies that show children who are circumcised early have double the rate of autism. It’s highly likely because they’re given Tylenol.” Was he trying to persuade parents to avoid circumcision, Tylenol (the most popular brand of acetaminophen) or both?...
Why not read it for exactly what it is, an observation that you can take into account when deciding whether to have your child circumcised and, if you do, what form of pain relief do you want? What's confusing or shameful about that? Health info often comes in this form — studies find that a substance is associated with a health problem. It might not be causal, but don't parents have the right to decide if they should take the risk?
Posts
70 comments:
Lolol. Ann, do you not understand this is the same argument that was employed AGAINST letting parents in several states decide what healthcare is right for their transgender child suffering gender dysphoria? We can't trust the parents anymore. They mutilate their kids and there's no undoing that. The State knows best what medical care your kids should get. Now shut up and follow, woman... /s
"The headline makes it sound as though human beings cannot be trusted with information."
If you start giving people information in one area, they might demand it in others. Why are there so many illegals? Why do we keep getting into wars? Why did a jar of peanut butter and a pound of coffee cost me $20? Questions, questions, questions...
Boys, not children.
The correlation is with acetaminophen, in a cohort study of circumcised boys.
Democrats have become the Andy Rooneys of this century.
Most people like to be directed. But it varies as to how much or how little an individual likes to take direction from others. I don't know if there's been a study done on this, but I would suspect that left leaning people tend to prefer more direction from perceived higher ups than do right leaning people. While leftists love to think they are more independent thinkers, the evidence of my senses tells me that they are much more cult-like, more clone-like in their thinking. Hell...they've been made to argue that you cannot define what a woman is. It seems it's more important to follow the group lead, than to answer based on reality.
And though there are most definitely right leaning clone-like groups ("I agree with whatever Tucker says!"), for the most part, people on the right tend to be more focused on individual actions and rights, less about group actions and rights.
All this rambling said, I think Democrats/progressives need someone in a white lab coat, or at least with multiple post grad degrees, to tell them what the government directives are so they can believe in them and follow them.
Republicans/conservatives tend to question that person with a white lab coat telling them anything because like the old saying goes: "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."
Conservative minds will not be confused by any of this.
Progressive minds are in a twirl, not sure what or who to believe, staring at their newborn boys penises wondering what to do next.
Circumspectism.
From what I've seen the media has been doing a much better job of confusing people over this issue than RFK jr could ever do.
RFK confuses and shames parents. LOL. People are shameless today. And how is he confusing them? By stating science they don't want to hear?
I guess circumcision cant be undone. According to my sister, the whole circumcision fad - which started after WW2 with the boomers - is going away. Good. Unless you're doing it for religious reasons (Jews, Muslims), its unneccessary and possibly unhealthy.
…foreskin for a drop or two of wisky seems a bad trade until I realized Catholics get nuthin…
Whoops should have read the actual paragraph and not just the headline. Anyway, don't circumcise your kid, then he wont need a painkiller.
Democrats are just bad faith people.
Jessica Grose makes the case for censoring websites that provide medical information. So many different opinions, so confusing.
‘Welcome to life, little buddy! We, as your parents, are gonna love and cherish you. We’ll also do our best to protect you from life’s sharp edges and physical harm.
Now, hold still while someone chops off a piece from the most delicate and sensitive part of your body…’
NYT writers default position (shared by extreme sufferers of TDS); "If Trump, or a person in Trump's administration takes a position--it's wrong." Of course that default position will sometimes make a person look stupid, but hey, that's the price of the game.
"The headline makes it sound as though human beings cannot be trusted..." How very gracious of you, as if it was inadvertent. Which is not to say I buy into the idea. And, I wonder why they didn't refer to the subjects as 'penis-bearing persons'. Maybe it's progress, who know. A truly trans-man would have a penis constructed, and then get it circumcised, Change My Mind.
Follow the money.
"I don't know if there's been a study done on this, but I would suspect that left leaning people tend to prefer more direction from perceived higher ups than do right leaning people."
Heh. I remember my Father used to begin a sentence with "If a study were done, it would show that ...". Why follow the Science when you can lead it?
Funny how once Tucker turned on Israel, he gets these random, unsupported shots taken at him all the time.
Here is Joe Rogan taking down Bari Weiss for the same kind of knee jerk neoconism. Turns out that she couldn't even define the terms she was using, and certainly couldn't support her use of the terms.
Joe Rogan EXPOSES Bari Weiss's Baseless Smears Against Tulsi - Glenn Greenwald on YouTube
How did he expose her? Just asked her honest questions. That's why Newsom calls him a "right wing tough guy." Eventually she switches to genuine whataboutism, attacking Tulsi Gabbard for beliefs she had when she was twenty about something totally irrelevant to the discussion anyway.
Had a co-worker who bought a Toyota Foreskin. As I recall, he was quite happy with it.
A truly trans-man would have a penis constructed, and then get it circumcised, Change My Mind.
----------
Don't steal a dead man's schtick...
He hasn't even been dead a year yet.
Fight your own battles. We do. Why can't you or your boys?
Don't want Tylenol? Make laudanum great again!
The Left HATES it when people are given information and left to think for themselves.
Thus all the censorship programs whenever they have power
Studies "linking" this or that to that or this are almost literally a dime a dozen.
People will believe whichever studies suit their purposes and discard the rest.
"Why not read it for exactly what it is..."
Althouse tries out her new standup routine. Not bad. I laughed.
Removing the foreskin from a boy... uh, child's penis, has been a practice for thousands of years, among billions of families.
RCOCEAN II said...
Unless you're doing it for religious reasons (Jews, Muslims), its unneccessary and possibly unhealthy.
Wrong, as usual:
Yes, there are numerous scientific studies, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses, and observational research, demonstrating that male circumcision reduces the risk of acquiring HIV (often referred to as AIDS in its advanced stage) infection in men, particularly through heterosexual intercourse. The World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) endorse voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) as an effective HIV prevention strategy in high-prevalence settings, estimating a ~60% reduction in risk for heterosexual men. This protective effect is attributed to the removal of the foreskin, which harbors HIV-susceptible cells and can trap inflammatory microbes that facilitate infection.
Circumcision is good, and it's never going to be easier than doing it early, where you don't remember the pain
From the post:
"Why not read it for exactly what it is, an observation that you can take into account when deciding whether to have your child circumcised and, if you do, what form of pain relief do you want?"
Because that's not the point. The point is that professionals, not parents, get to decide what's best for the kids.
This is of a piece with the SCOTUS rejection to hear the parental rights case from Colorado<)a>. Parents can't be trusted to make decisions for their kids. The rights of experts trump the rights of parents. "For the children."
Now that Jews cause autism I’m nostalgic for the days when it was just vaccines.
I read the meta study that RFKJr was discussing - the circumcision study was one of many that the meta study referenced. It was significant in that the two populations - circumcised and not - were otherwise statistically identical, but the circumcised cohort had (if memory serves) double the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders as the un- cohort. And the study makes clear that they chose these two cohorts specifically because acetaminophen/paracetamol is given so often to baby boys undergoing circumcision that circumcision can be used as a proxy for acetaminophen exposure.
The meta study concludes that acetaminophen exposure during a period of "oxidative stress" (they at least imply not just incidentally "during" but often as a result of* the child's undergoing "oxidative stress") and while the child is in a particular developmental window is responsible for "most" cases of autism.
* The meta study counts this characterization - "during" rather than "because of" stress - as a prominent error that many studies have made in determining what data to include. These studies consider the stress to be a confounding factor rather than a contributing cause, and they tend to discount those days.
OMG OMG OMG Trump is firing all the "experts" at the CDC and he appointed an HHS secretary that's not a doctor. This is authoritarianism. He's giving the people misinformation. OMG what will we do?
So much for "my body my choice" and keep the government out of my bedroom/doctors' office/etc.
Sorry, those DATA.
Does anyone still rely on kennedy- or trump for that matter -for accurate health information? I suppose people here do.
The corrupt left have destroyed and are on the march to destroy it further - our health care system.
Democrats are making it illegal to make basic choices. If you want to pay out of pocket - illegal. If you need Medicaid - you have to be so poor as to not own anything and not have a cent in your bank account.
WE pay and pay and pay - and we get less and less - and our freedoms are diminished - All on purpose - from the corrupt democratic-Socialist Party USA.
"particularly through heterosexual intercourse. The World Health Organization (WHO) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) endorse voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) as an effective HIV prevention strategy in high-prevalence settings, "
So in some countries, it's a good idea.
Hit and run, unsupported by factual reference, slam at Kennedy noted.
A snarky article written for her Brown University girlfriends is as useful as tits on a bull. She might even have several good points, but comes off as a know it all who's main argument is an appeal to authority. I renember the good old days when libtards sported a Question Authority bumper sticker on their baby puke yellow Vulva 242 with a broken taillight. I believe you, Anita
HIV is primarily transmitted through sodomy by transgender males, particularly those who participate in social liberal club. It is also transmitted by intravenous drug users and contaminated blood.
I am not an expert in autism, nor an epidemiologist, but this is the sharing of a thesis: that tylenol/acetaminophen is a contributing factor/causative factor in autism, and that tylenol exposure at a specific time point is directly correlated to much higher autism rates (i.e. "Double")
A few things here:
- Nothing wrong with sharing this information when presented in the right way
- It's a thesis you can then test in a number of ways
- Either way, and lets assume the thesis is confirmed, it establishes tylenol doesn't cause autism, but it can increase it's likelihood. That means the cause is still unknown, but contributing factors are being identified. That's good science.
As far as I can tell, this is more well founded than vaccines cause autism and that has caused issues for nearly 30 years.
If you teach your boys to lift the foreskin and wash, and use a condom when they don't know the HIV status of the person they're sleeping with, very few uncircumsised men have complications...
As for this? n.n said...
HIV is primarily transmitted through sodomy by transgender males, particularly those who participate in social liberal club. It is also transmitted by intravenous drug users and contaminated blood.
Trans men actually have the lowest HIV transmission rate of all. Safest penetration you could ask for!
Iman said...
“Had a co-worker who bought a Toyota Foreskin. As I recall, he was quite happy with it.”
You have to be careful, though, because some older models had a design defect that - over time - it could limp and sag, and even potentially snap in two, which nobody wants.
Over time, water or any other liquid could pool in areas missing a little drain hole, causing rot. Toyota tried protecting some models with a protective sheath, but that was only a temporary solution.
Toyota ended up having to spend large sums of money on customers affected by this.
jim5301 said...
Does anyone still rely on kennedy- or trump for that matter -for accurate health information? I suppose people here do.
Says the idiot who relied on Fauci for "health information".
Jaq said...
So in some countries, it's a good idea.
"the foreskin, which .. can trap inflammatory microbes that facilitate infection."
It's the "can trap inflammatory microbes that facilitate infection" part that I key on, because that affects all males, in every country, not just heterosexual males in Africa.
this is more well founded than vaccines cause autism and that has caused issues for nearly 30 years.
And, if borne out by further study (which was the point of the meta study - that this link deserves more and specific study and that clinical practice ought already to have responded to the apparent link), could explain the anecdotal observations of all the parents who linked the timing of their children's vaccines and the onset of regressive autism. Of course these observations have been written off as confirmation bias - but what if they gave their babies and toddlers acetaminophen for their post-vaccine discomfort, as they were advised to do, and that, combined with whatever else made that child vulnerable, kicked off the regression? If babies who were given Tylenol were not included in a study because the administration of medication was considered a confounding factor, no link would show up.
My wife asked her 92-year old mother if she took Tylenol when she was pregnant with her. She replied "Only if I was hung over."
No, "only" in this case clearly means that any parent who takes Kennedy seriously will be confused and guilted.
The man has no business making this inane statement, but I guess that is what he was hired to do.
I was never a "vaccines cause autism" proponent. But reading that study has made me think twice about what else vaccines and other things that produce an immune or stress response might have on common.
It's really just a hypothetical. Stop thinking with your foreskins, which have infectious downsides too. But if the message here is to limit exposure to drugs in infant boys, there's no reason not to research further.
Some of the research needs to include the effect of pain in infancy, but male "circumsion" doesn't rank high on that scale compared with dental and ear and breathing issues. I'd start with ear issues, which have already been proven to be trauma-inducing in children, plus innocent, previous SSRI use by pregnant women.
If the take-away is vigilance for fewer drugs in an infant's body, who can disagree?
RFKJr has already said that his comments have been mischaracterized ("as usual," he said) - he's not talking about circumcision as a practice.
If the take-away is vigilance for fewer drugs in an infant's body, who can disagree?
Three guesses!
This said, we do have to approach with caution: the precautionary principle is often bad too. But man, I hope this doesn't make a bunch of progressive women start giving their small children Tylenol with their gummy vitamins or whatever else they give them.
RFKJr has already said that his comments have been mischaracterized ("as usual," he said) - he's not talking about circumcision as a practice.
Oopsie-poopsie!
The man has been in the business of making public statements for what, fifty years?
Dont mutilate your sons penis without his permission. If he wants to get circumicized he can do it at 18.
I dont know a single man with an uncut dick who got "infections". But then they're not Gay.
The headline makes it sound as though human beings cannot be trusted with information.
You have just identified the leftist mindset. Pretty much everything they have done since the Obama era involves trying to keep the public from knowing stuff. Obamacare? Have to pass it to see what is in it. Questioning the Covid vaccine? Government pressures Facebook and the like to censor and suppress even the slightest hint that there may be an issue. Voting irregularities? Lets not look into it so that we can continue to assert that there is no evidence of voter fraud. Etc.
Even if RFK is/proves wrong on his medical hunches, people should still appreciate his efforts to end the sort of exclusive franchise that the public health establishment has tried to hold on medical information. Similarly, even people who didn't agree with Charlie Kirk's religious and patriotic values should still applaud him for the way he actively promoted the value of civil discourse.
boatbuilder said...
My wife asked her 92-year old mother if she took Tylenol when she was pregnant with her. She replied "Only if I was hung over."
Tylenol wasn't available OTC until 1960. Sounds like false memory to me. Probably took quite a bit of aspirin.
Jews have been circumcising their baby sons for over 3000 years. So now it causes a higher rate of Autism because of Tylenol use? Whatever… I believe Jewish parents are smart enough to make an informed decision, not based on RFK Jr. latest theories. Most parents are cautious about giving their babies any drugs haphazardly.
Yes Inga, the use of Tylenol in hospital circumcisions, not those done by a moyle, who use alcohol traditionally, it's not the circumcision itself, seems very likely to increase the risk of autism in genetically susceptible boys. Why is it wrong for parents to have this information?
The use of the term "Jews" is very reductive, BTW, and it's almost never grammatically required.
“Today, in a cabinet meeting, U.S. secretary of health and human services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., claimed that there is a link between autism and circumcision. “There’s two studies that show children who are circumcised early have double the rate of autism. It’s highly likely because they are given Tylenol,” he stated, without citing the studies.
Kennedy was probably referring to a 2013 study of eight countries and a 2015 study from Denmark, both of which claimed to show a link between circumcision and autism rates. Helen Tager-Flusberg, an autism researcher and a professor emerita at Boston University, calls the methods used in those studies “appalling.” Tager-Flusberg leads the Coalition of Autism Scientists, a group that advocates for high-quality autism research.
Neither study shows a causal link between circumcision—or the pain relief medications that are often prescribed along with the procedure—and higher rates of autism. In the decade-plus since each was published, autism researchers have heavily criticized these studies.And after reviewing both studies, scientists last year found no evidence supporting the claim that circumcision leads to autism or any other adverse psychological effects.”
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rfk-jr-cites-truly-appalling-studies-to-tie-autism-to-circumcision-and/
My sister was born post 1960 and my mother would be in her late 90's were she still alive.
Seinfeld presented the last word on circumcision
Inga plays three card monte with the facts, and changes the claim from Tylenol to circumcision in order to pretend to prove her point.
“The use of the term "Jews" is very reductive, BTW, and it's almost never grammatically required.”
As a noun: "Jews" is the plural noun for Jewish people, and "a Jew" refers to an individual. Both are acceptable and not inherently offensive.“
It's like the Democrats are either painfully stupid —Is it like being high all the time? Or they think that playing stupid is good politics.
“Inga plays three card monte with the facts, and changes the claim from Tylenol to circumcision in order to pretend to prove her point.”
I said…”So now it causes a higher rate of Autism because of Tylenol use?”
I guess Jaq missed this sentence of mine in his haste to make an ass of himself.
Timofey, don’t you have some Russian propaganda to peddle?
Well, gee, if it says it on line, it must be true, just like the stuff about circumcision and autism!
Well, missy,
after reviewing both studies, scientists last year found no evidence supporting the claim that circumcision leads to autism
The conclusion in your link did not address Tylenol, did it.
I guess you can't be a good Democrat if you don't implicitly trust ever pronouncement out of the military industrial complex that has gotten us into war after war after war, how things have changed. Remember when they used to say "Question Authority"?
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.