Tylenol Debacle

Oh Mr. President.I don’t like it when the President becomes the frontman for disseminating medical information. The Dr. Trump schtick didn’t play well during the COVID pandemic and is certainly not well received with the latest Tylenol-autism controversy. Cue the hysteria from the left. One would have thought he had learned his lesson the first time when he chose to be the authority on a medical issue. Not a good look for the administration. And remember how that worked out last time: people double-masked and wearing oven mitts when driving in cars. Alone. And the response has been predictable in this age of TDS, where anything Trump says is met with vehement opposition. Liberal pregnant persons, as a nod to their chosen vernacular, may now choose to gobble down Acetaminophen tablets like M&Ms just out of spite.  But there has to be a committee with expertise that engaged in some degree of medical research and a review of the literature that came to these conclusions associating the use of acetaminophen with autism when taken during pregnancy. Assign one of those medical nerds to take the heat and present the data logically, concisely, and coherently. And please, not Bobby. He is far too controversial.  And listening to him speak makes my throat sore.  It should have gone something like this:  “After an extensive review of the literature, our panel of experts concluded that acetaminophen should be used with caution during pregnancy, and at the minimal effective dose, due to a possible association with the development of autism in children exposed in utero. Research is ongoing.” Period. But no. In typical Trump grandiose fashion, we received the message that Tylenol is bad. It’s bad. Don’t take it! But a review of the most common literature citations reveals studies that show an association between higher concentrations of acetaminophen in umbilical cord samples and the development of autism. Some studies conclude that there is no association between Acetominohen and autism. However, as in all retrospective studies, there are too many variables. For example, do you recall how much Acetaminophen you took during pregnancy?  And how much did you take?  And what else were you taking? And why were you taking it?  Do you have any additional pre-existing conditions? Did you drink alcohol during your pregnancy? How much? Did you take any other drugs? Smoke? Smoke weed?  Were you exposed to environmental or chemical contaminants?  Are you obese? Did you have complications during pregnancy? How long were you in labor? Was there fetal distress? Was the delivery by C-section? We could go on, but we’d be here all day. But the point is that the issue is complex with an infinite number of variables. Even the defense of acetaminophen from the medical community has been weak, suggesting that fever and illness best treated with acetaminophen may actually be the causative factor in developing autism, not the medication. But that fails to explain the increasing occurrence of autism in first-world nations with easy access to acetaminophen, when it appears that it occurs to a lesser extent in cultures with lower exposure. Historically, one would suspect that those same illnesses and fevers would have occurred with similar frequency, if not in greater numbers, hundreds of years ago, before the advent of acetaminophen as a therapeutic treatment. And yet autism was not as prevalent. However, perhaps the diagnostic criteria have changed such that the spectrum has widened, capturing a greater number of mild cases in the net, thus giving the appearance of increasing prevalence. Again, it is a complex topic that warrants further research. But for the time being, you and your physician have to weigh the risk versus benefit ratio of using acetaminophen during pregnancy. At the very least, add it to the list of things you should try to avoid unless absolutely necessary. Why take the chance, regardless of which political party issues the warning

 

Again

The left’s hypocrisy is truly astonishing. A piece appeared in the New York magazine claiming that Trump and his cast of MAGA warriors have destroyed comedy by attacking free speech. It of course supplies an additional laundry list of all of the left’s grievances against this administration, charging Trump with “destabilizing the world economy,” deporting citizens, “suppression of LGBTQ and women’s rights,” the “rise of authoritarianism” and the “collapse of the federal government,” all leading to comedians being able to resurrect using the R-word to criticize their peers who voted for him. Yes, that word is “retard.” Wow. A whole article inspired by an HBO special based on a comment about the fictional suppression of free speech so that comedians can apply a slur to Trump voters. Pickings must be slim for clickbait. None of these journalistic geniuses recalls the demise of comedy in the woke era that preceded Trump’s re-election. Comedians lamented that mining for material that poked fun at race, homosexuality, trans-genderism, ethnicity, or even overweight people resulted in accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and body shaming. 

Stereotyping has long been the mainstay of comedy. Not anymore. How many comedians have had to roll back comments deemed offensive to some minority group lest they be cancelled? Remember when a diminutive black comedian was criticized for hosting a children’s birthday party with a Cowboys and Indians theme?  Alas, the only group remaining that can be bashed with impunity seems to be white heterosexual males. And if it weren’t for Donald Trump, most late-night talk show hosts wouldn’t have any material. Does anyone remember Frank Sinatra, widely credited with supporting equal accommodations for his Black musicians when on tour, mercilessly making what would now be considered racist jokes at Sammy Davis Junior’s expense onstage?  And Sammy giving it right back to the man who helped make his career. And does anyone recall Don Rickles? He would never have survived in this hypersensitive age of partisan division. In the words of Andrew Breitbart: “The left thrives on division and victimhood.” And the New York magazine is just offering us more of the same. 

Defaming Charlie

Breitbart had a caller this morning who launched into a rant that Charlie Kirk was a bigot, a racist, and despite being asked multiple times to explain what Charlie had ever said to make him come to that conclusion, he refused and just continued to parrot the Democrat talking points. Slater, the host, finally had enough and hung up on him, declaring there was no better poster child for the left: someone not willing to engage in thoughtful discussion but wanting only his views to be heard without justification for them. Slater’s guest said he’s tired of it and refuses to engage with the left. He said that we have to adopt their tactics of cancellation, boycott, and doxing. No more trying to appease a group of people who have shown time and again that they promote violence against us, that fund organizations that burn our cities and destroy property and take what isn’t theirs. He has a point.

Charlie Kirk

I made the mistake of going on HuffPo to see the left’s comments on the Kirk assassination. Big mistake. About 80% of the comments were from lefties who accused Kirk of being a “provocateur,” if not outright calling him a misogynistic, racist, homophobic hate monger. And of course, all of them referencing Jan 6 as being the start of political violence. Totally ignorant of the fact that the only person to die on that day was an unarmed woman. No mention of the BLM riots, of course. All deflection and finger-pointing with a smattering of gun ban talk. Too many are basically saying he deserved it because he supported the Second Amendment. The left is composed of some truly horrible people. This is not my America.

The Black Mystique

A Black caller from Milwaukee called in to “Charlemagne tha God’s” talk show and praised Trump coming into urban areas to clean up crime, stating that he was a productive member of society, working, paying a mortgage and putting his kids through school, but was sick of having his life disrupted by YNs (Black speak for young, the N word) with no future, causing mayhem. He was attacked by the Black hosts who claimed that the Black community had offered solutions but had been rejected by the government…..implying, of course, “white government”. The solutions?  Gun control, and more social programs for mental health, and the channeling of those Black offenders into vocations. What a swerve! Black, Democrat run cities controlling their cities’ destiny and that of their Black inhabitants, yet have failed to do so. And when Trump suggests a radical plan to control the violence, they double down on their failed policies. It is interesting that the caller also rejected gun control, stating that he needs to protect his family and gun control would only prevent him from doing that.  And this in the wake of a most recent 14-time offender, released onto the streets, stabs a woman to death with no provocation on a commuter train in Charlotte, North Carolina. The criminal statistics generated by the Black community as a whole are abysmal,  negating the contribution of those who are a credit to their race and country, the likes of George Schuyler, Thomas Sowell, and Elridge Cleaver. Do they heed their words of wisdom for guidance? No, they do not; they choose the diatribes of Al Sharpton,  Alexandria Corteze. and Jasmine Crockett.

Shame On You Harvard

Did you happen to catch the Atlantic article that revealed the level of grade inflation at Harvard? In 2001, 33% of students received an A in classes. By 2021, that figure had reached 80%. The Dean’s response was that professors have spent more time addressing the emotional needs of students, particularly those with disabilities. Huh? Meritocracy wanes in Cambridge, MA.