Prenatal and postnatal exposure to acetaminophen in relation to autism spectrum and attention-deficit and hyperactivity symptoms in childhood: Meta-analysis in six European population-based cohorts
link.springer.com
The potential etiological role of early acetaminophen exposure on Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC) and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is inconclusive. We aimed to study this association in a collaborative study of six European population-based birth/child cohorts. A total of 73,881 mother–child pairs were included in the study. Prenatal and postnatal (up to 18 months) acetaminophen exposure was assessed through maternal questionnaires or interviews. ASC and ADHD symptoms were assessed at 4–12 years of age using validated instruments. Children were classified as having borderline/clinical symptoms using recommended cutoffs for each instrument. Hospital diagnoses were also available in one cohort. Analyses were adjusted for child and maternal characteristics along with indications for acetaminophen use. Adjusted cohort-specific effect estimates were combined using random-effects meta-analysis. The proportion of children having borderline/clinical symptoms ranged between 0.9 and 12.9% for ASC and between 1.2 and 12.2% for ADHD. Results indicated that children prenatally exposed to acetaminophen were 19% and 21% more likely to subsequently have borderline or clinical ASC (OR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.07–1.33) and ADHD symptoms (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.07–1.36) compared to non-exposed children. Boys and girls showed higher odds for ASC and ADHD symptoms after prenatal exposure, though these associations were slightly stronger among boys. Postnatal exposure to acetaminophen was not associated with ASC or ADHD symptoms. These results replicate previous work and support providing clear information to pregnant women and their partners about potential long-term risks of acetaminophen use.

From the Discussion section:

The results of our meta-analysis representing more than 70,000 children of six European population-based birth/child cohorts indicated that children prenatally exposed to acetaminophen were 19% and 21% more likely to subsequently have ASC and ADHD symptoms within the borderline/clinical range, respectively, compared with non-exposed children. The association with ASC was attenuated after omitting the largest cohort but remained positive. When stratifying by sex, these associations were slightly stronger among boys compared to girls but positive associations with effect sizes of similar magnitude were observed in both strata, especially in the case of ADHD. Postnatal exposure to acetaminophen was not associated with either of the outcome, thought there was evidence of between-study heterogeneity for the association with ASC symptoms.

From the Outcomes section:

ASC and ADHD symptoms were assessed using validated parent-reported questionnaires or linked hospital records. Autistic symptoms were assessed using the Development And Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) [18] (ALSPAC), the Pervasive Developmental Problems (PDP) subscale of the Child Behaviour Checklist for Toddlers (CBCL1½–5) [19] (GASPII and The Generation R Study), the Childhood Autism Spectrum Test (CAST) [20] (INMA) and an ASC scale derived from the CBCL for 6–18 (CBCL6–18) [21] (RHEA). ADHD symptoms were assessed using the Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) [18] (ALSPAC); the Conner’s Parent Rating Scale Revised short form (CPRS-R:S) [22] (The Generation R Study), the Hyperactivity/Inattention subscale of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) [23] (DNBC), the Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity problems subscale of the CBCL1½-5 and CBCL6/18 (GASPII and RHEA), and the ADHD Criteria of DSM-IV (DSM-ADHD Questionnaire) [24] (INMA). Higher scores indicate more symptoms.

  • Chomsky [comrade/them]
    ·
    4 years ago

    I explained it in other posts in this thread. Long tradition of corporate anti science combined with profit motive at the heart of the health care system (which, if wakefield was paid to falsify studies, is a pretty good case in point). base--->superstructure.

    It is like policing, this is not a bad apple issue, this is a systemic issue that arises from material conditions of capitalism.

      • Chomsky [comrade/them]
        ·
        4 years ago

        I'm trying to make a point that continuing to talk about this guy 23 years after his study was pulled right after it was published, near unanimous condemnation by the medical community and the loss of his medical lisence, feeds into a liberal narrative that the anti vax issues is the result of a tiny handful of bad apple scientists and poorly educated deplorables and my concern that this narrative actually worsen the situation by causing cognitive dissonance while masking the real issue from the mainstream discourse. I thought he was a sloppy quack, I was corrected that he was a fradulent quack, but that doesn't change the simple point I was trying to make.

          • Chomsky [comrade/them]
            ·
            4 years ago

            You can link 200 thousand videos by hbomberguy and I am not going to believe the claim that one 23 year old study caused a mistrust in MMR vaccines that stretches both decades before and after the study and evidently is somehow applicable to a totally unrelated study about acetaminophen. What other award winning materialist theories do you have? That Franz Ferdinand's assasination started WWI? Can you link me an hbomberguy video on that too?

            • sysgen [none/use name,they/them]
              ·
              4 years ago

              Opposition to MMR vaccination existed before but not even within two orders of magnitude of after Wakefield's study.

              The material backing is pretty simple. Wakefield found a way to make a hundred million dollars or more from associating vaccination to autism. That allowed him to deploy a massive amount of resources to making the association in society. And it did.

              • Chomsky [comrade/them]
                ·
                4 years ago

                Right, he expoited an existing fear.

                Anyway, I don't want to beleaguer the point any further beyond the study is in the past and further discrediting of Wakefield is going to have tremendous diminishing returns at this point. We need to pivot away from that to a more robust materialist anaylsis of anti scienctific conspiracy. That's it. I have no desire to defend Wakefield. Throw him in from of a state of the art Chinese high speed locomotive for all I care.

              • Chomsky [comrade/them]
                ·
                4 years ago

                Obnoxious debate bro, get off your high horse comrade. Your initial comment was rude and unconstructive.

                Franz Ferdinand is a commonly used liberal explanation for the start of world war I, which is taught widely in school and masks the material causes of world war I, imperialist and colonial competition. Not addressing those root causes led to WWII when Germany, Itay, and Japan sought out colonial expansion in competition with the established powers and liberals blame on Hitler being kicked out of art scool and the same shit will lead to WWIII between China and US for which liberals will come up with some orientalist nonsense to explain. Here we are in 2021 talking about bogey man wakenfield, zero root causes were addressed and half the planet is scared to take the covid vaccine.