There is a special kind of lie — a lie wrapped in concern. It is served under the guise of «worry for the nation’s health» and appeals not to reason, but to primal fear, especially a parent’s fear for their child. This very tool was deployed at a recent Trump administration press conference, where Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. presented the public with an «indictment.»
At its center is a shocking narrative, backed by an official press release from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Evidence #1: Fabricated «Epidemic»
We are told about a «catastrophic» increase in diagnoses of «autism» (ASD) — from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 31 children. The figures thrown at the public are meant to incite panic and demand immediate action. «The rapid rise in autism,» Kennedy proclaims, «is one of the most alarming events in the history of public health.»
It sounds convincing. Even frightening. Right up until you open the first page of any serious epidemiological report from the last 20 years. And there you discover that the bulk of this «rapid rise» is not a biological epidemic, but a statistical artifact. It is explained by two transparent and long-known scientific factors:
Diagnostic Substitution. Conditions that were classified for decades as «intellectual disability» or even «childhood schizophrenia» are now correctly diagnosed in the US as autism spectrum disorders. Doctors have become better at understanding the issue. The number of patients hasn’t changed; it’s the diagnosis name in their medical records that has. The graphs are inexorable: the curve for «intellectual disability» diagnoses falls almost mirror-like to how the ASD diagnosis curve rises.
Expansion of Diagnostic Criteria. Diagnostic manuals (DSM) have significantly expanded the very definition of autism over time. Milder forms that were previously dismissed as «personality quirks» have been included in the spectrum. This is clearly visible in the data: from 2000 to 2016, the prevalence of mild autism (not requiring constant care) increased several times, while the prevalence of severe autism grew much more modestly.
Evidence #2: Statistics Tortured Until They Confessed
To sell the public the idea that the «epidemic» is caused by some new external factor (Tylenol, aka Acetaminophen, aka Paracetamol), the creators of this narrative needed to prove that the number of severe autism cases is specifically increasing. Why? And here’s the key phrase in the HHS press release that was supposed to be their main trump card:
«The percentage of ASD cases with higher IQ (>85) has steadily declined over the last six reports… Nearly two-thirds of children with ASD… had either severe or borderline intellectual disability.»
This statement is a lie. It not only contradicts scientific data but also basic logic. If you expand diagnostic criteria and start including milder cases in the statistics (people who were previously considered just «uncommunicative»), the average IQ in your sample should rise, not fall.
So how did they get the result they wanted?
The answer was found after a meticulous analysis of the methodology of the ADDM (Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring) reports that HHS references. It turned out that the focus lies not in what was counted, but in how it was counted.
Problem of Incomplete Data: The percentage of children with a particular IQ is calculated only for those who were tested at all. Reports always had a huge portion of children without IQ data.
Changing the Rules of the Game: Initially, reports included data only from sites where IQ was measured for the overwhelming majority of children (nearly 90%). This gave a relatively objective picture.
Artificial Sample Bias: But over time, the rules were relaxed. Statistics began to include data from sites where IQ was measured for only a small portion of children. And now the key question: who gets tested first at such sites? Correct, the most severe cases. Those who don’t speak, have obvious impairments, need urgent help and resources. Children with preserved intelligence who manage in regular school simply didn’t make it into this sample.
As a result, a flood of data disproportionately loaded with severe cases poured into the overall statistics. The percentage of children with low IQ seemed to be growing not because there were more of them in reality, but because the counting method itself changed. They started comparing apples to oranges, passing off a methodological artifact as a real trend.
Hank Green calls this «lawyerly bullshit.» This is not a scientific search for truth. This is advocacy. This is the deliberate selection of the only set of data that, when incorrectly interpreted, confirms a pre-prepared conclusion. The goal is not to inform, but to «convince the jury.» Or, in this case, the entire nation’s population.
So, the «epidemic» is fabricated. The rise in «severe cases» is the result of a statistical trick. Moving on to the «main suspect.»
Evidence #3: Smoke Screen
Here I must make a caveat to avoid misunderstanding: Tylenol (paracetamol, acetaminophen) is not a vitamin. It is a serious drug with proven risks, the main one being toxic liver damage from overdose. No sane person would advocate taking it without reason.
And that is precisely why the campaign to attribute fictional risks to it appears almost criminal. We have a fabricated «epidemic» of a complex condition that terrifies expectant parents to their core. This area of uncertainty and fear is the perfect breeding ground for conspiracy theories. From the unknown, it is very easy to appoint a simple and understandable culprit. For example, one pill.
The Trump administration points the finger at the Tylenol pill. Their «evidence»? References to a series of observational studies that do indeed find a correlation between taking the drug during pregnancy and the risk of ASD in the child. Correlation!
Correlation does not imply causation. This is basic scientific literacy, which the Trump administration seems to deliberately ignore. Their argumentation suffers from one fundamental cognitive bias known as «confounding by indication».
In simple terms: women take the fever reducer (Tylenol) because they have a reason to do so — fever, pain, inflammation, infection. It is this reason, not the medicine that fights its symptoms, that is the real, established, and well-researched risk factor.
The Real Suspect — Inflammation. There is a huge body of data linking the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in the fetus to maternal infection and inflammation during pregnancy. A classic example is the rubella epidemic of the 1960s, after which up to 13% of children of infected mothers received an autism diagnosis. In his breakdown of this topic, psychiatrist Alok Kanojia (Dr. K) cites an illustrative example: if the correlation of potential risk from paracetamol intake is about 20%, then the risk associated with a respiratory infection (the very one for which the fever reducer is taken) is 264%. That’s a difference of more than 10 times.
Paracetamol is the only widely available fever reducer recommended for pregnant women to combat fever. Fever that, unlike unproven theories, has quite real, confirmed risks to the fetus — from neural tube and heart defects to miscarriage. Accusing the drug that reduces this risk of causing it is, at best, idiocy, and at worst, deliberate intellectual dishonesty.
Alibi — Sibling Studies. How to separate the effect of the drug from the effect of the illness? Scientists take huge datasets and compare full siblings born to the same mother. In this case, genetics and most environmental factors are the same. If a woman took paracetamol during one pregnancy and didn’t during another, you can see the pure effect of the drug itself. And these studies show that there is no difference in the risk assessment for autism. At all. All that «increased risk» seen in simpler studies was actually related not to the medicine, but to common family factors — be it genetics or predisposition to the very illnesses that paracetamol partially helps with.
Any honest scientist, looking at this data, would immediately understand the whole essence of what’s happening.
But the goal of this show is not the search for truth.
While public attention is riveted to a phantom threat, real, confirmed risk factors are not mentioned. These include parental age (ASD risk 55% higher for fathers over 40), maternal chronic conditions like diabetes, and premature birth.
If the scientific data is so unequivocal, then why all this? What is the ultimate goal of this spectacle?
Why launch such a complex and risky campaign to discredit a safe medicine, risking the health of pregnant women who will now, apparently, be convinced to «tough it out» through fever dangerous to the fetus?
The Accused: Corruption Covered by Concern for the Nation
The answer, in my opinion, lies on the surface. And to see it, you just need to know what Robert F. Kennedy Jr. built his entire public career on. His modus operandi has been the same for decades: take a complex medical problem, find a simple «culprit» in it (most often — vaccines), create moral panic around it, and then monetize this fear. Over his career, he has earned millions of dollars in salary, book royalties, and, most importantly, court referrals. For example, since 2022, he has earned about $2.5 million in referral fees for bringing clients to a law firm suing vaccine manufacturer Merck.
Step One: Discredit the Competitor
To understand how high the stakes are, you need to know: in the US, a massive legal campaign is underway against Tylenol manufacturers and retailers. This is not a couple of random lawsuits; it’s so-called MDL (Multi-district litigation) — hundreds of cases from across the country combined into one gigantic proceeding. Over 440 lawsuits have been filed in this MDL, and the potential number of plaintiffs waiting their turn exceeds 100,000. Billions are at stake. And to win such a case, plaintiffs desperately need a «scientific» battering ram to breach the defendants’ defense.
And here, «quite by chance,» such a ram appears. The key «scientific» document that Kennedy Jr. relies on is the study by Didier Prada et al. (2025). And if we look at the «conflict of interest» section of this publication, we will find that the lead author, Dr. Andrea Baccarelli, clearly declares that he «served as an expert witness on behalf of plaintiffs in litigation regarding the use of the drug during pregnancy.» It is also known that Baccarelli discussed his study with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. by phone shortly before the official statements at the White House press conference.
Let me translate this from legal to human. The person whose study became the main ram in the attack on Tylenol received money from lawyers suing Tylenol manufacturers. His work is not an impartial scientific search. It is, essentially, a pre-prepared court argument paid for by one side of the conflict. So obvious that federal judge Denise L. Cot completely rejected Baccarelli’s testimony in a lawsuit against Tylenol manufacturer Johnson & Johnson due to lack of sufficient scientific evidence. In her decision, Judge Cot wrote that Baccarelli «selectively cherry-picked and distorted study results, and refused to acknowledge the role of genetics in the etiology» of autism spectrum disorders or ADHD. The judge also characterized his testimony as «alarming and problematic,» noting that he «was not qualified for some of his conclusions.» For his work as a plaintiffs’ expert witness, Baccarelli received no less than $150,000.
Attack on the Brand, Not the Substance
But there is one detail that directly confirms that this entire campaign is a legal strategy.
The active substance in question is acetaminophen (paracetamol). It is sold under different names by dozens of companies. In the US, this is not only Tylenol, but also Panadol, and countless generics under pharmacy chain brands like CVS Health or Walgreens. They are chemically identical.
However, all the Trump administration’s rhetoric, press headlines, and, most importantly, all the lawsuits are directed at one single brand: Tylenol.
If it were about a real health threat, the warning would concern the substance, not the trademark. The Department of Health would be obligated to warn: «Attention, pregnant women! Avoid acetaminophen!», listing all drugs containing it. But this is not happening. The focus on the brand, not the substance, shows: the goal is not fighting autism, but supporting a specific beneficiary in the courts.
Step Two: Promote Your Own Product
Parallel to demonizing Tylenol, something else interesting is happening. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. begins actively promoting leucovorin (folinic acid) as the «first FDA-recognized pathway for treating autism.»
However, in its own press release, the administration admits that leucovorin «is not a cure for ASD and may only lead to improvement in speech deficits in a subgroup of children.» The scientific community reacted immediately. A coalition of more than 260 leading autism researchers stated that the data does not support either the harm of Tylenol or the effectiveness of leucovorin as a «proven treatment method.» Other experts called the evidence «weak,» based on «small studies lacking independent replication.»
Putting two and two together… The state machine is used to destroy the reputation of a cheap, accessible, and relatively safe medicine by building a «medical» line of attack against the manufacturer in the courts. Create additional demand for another miracle pill. And at that very moment, an «innovative» and, obviously, much more expensive alternative is announced. It was reported that shortly before these events, researchers promoting their own purified version of leucovorin actively lobbied their work in the Trump administration, noting that they have «many investors who are excited about the drug.»
This is corruption in its purest form. It is the substitution of science with political games and financial interests. And the scariest part of this story is not that they are lying. It’s that this lie, covered by concern, will force real people to make decisions dangerous to their health. And that is the damage that cannot be measured in any money.
Verdict: Execution of Common Sense
Every action breeds a reaction. And on the wave of fabricated panic, predictably, a wave of denial rose through public performance. Social media flooded with videos of pregnant women demonstratively swallowing Tylenol pills on camera. This gesture, intended as an act of defiance and defense of science, is in fact a mirror image of the very stupidity it seeks to combat.
In refuting the lie about the link between Tylenol and autism, I am not claiming that it is a harmless mint lozenge. This is a fundamental error of binary thinking, into which both the panic-mongers and their opponents have fallen: if something is not absolute evil, it must be absolute good. But the real world and real science do not work that way.
Paracetamol is a serious chemical compound. Its main and well-studied risk is toxic liver damage when exceeding the dose. The difference between therapeutic and toxic doses is not as large as for many other drugs. That is why doctors always insist on strict adherence to dosage.
The decision to take it during pregnancy is a classic example of weighing risks. On one side of the scales — the potential but manageable risk of the drug itself. On the other — the real, proven, and much scarier risk of the consequences of high fever and severe infection for the fetal brain development. The scientific consensus is unequivocal: the second side outweighs. The medicine is taken because inaction is more dangerous.
Turning this complex medical calculation into a TikTok challenge means committing the same nastiness as Trump and Kennedy: substituting scientific discussion with a circus. This is an infantile rebellion, an attempt to respond to lies not with facts, but with recklessness. And in this battle of two primitive extremes, only one loses — public health.
Watch the breakdown of this press conference by popular medical blogger Dr. Mike Varshavsky. In him, you can see not just disagreement, but the existential fatigue of the entire professional community. He is forced to patiently explain to his multimillion audience the basics of scientific literacy — causal relationships and correlations, real risks of fever, the essence of studies — because the state, in the person of its highest officials, has abdicated this function and itself become the main source of disinformation and distrust in science as such (and it’s not just Trump; it was the same under Biden). When evidence-based medicine has to justify itself against slogans, when doctors become hostages of political circus — only those who staged this circus win.
Appeal: Forgot About People
In the end, it all comes down not to graphs and links to studies, but to one simple scene:
Two o’clock in the morning. Temperature 39.2. The pregnant woman is shaking with chills, but the real chill runs down her spine — from horror. Doctors say: fever in the first trimester can cause brain and heart defects. But the internet and news whisper: Tylenol, the only medicine allowed to her now, may be linked to autism. In her hand is a tiny pill that has become the embodiment of an impossible choice: save the child from a known danger today, risking facing an unknown one tomorrow? In her head, two fears battle: fear of the real illness and fear of the medicine, artificially created by those who should have protected her.
Here it is — the real, the scariest side effect of this story. Paralysis of will and reason imposed on millions of people for corrupt money.
This is a story about how politicians and manipulators exploit the natural desire to find simple answers to complex questions. They don’t need science with its «probably,» «correlates but does not cause,» and «requires weighing risks.» They need an enemy, a trial, and a verdict.
If society does not develop immunity to this intellectual poison, if it does not learn to distinguish analysis from panic, and concern from its cynical imitation, such stories will repeat again and again. Only the names of the bogeymen will change.