Again the problem is how this is written … “no conclusive evidence” will be read as “There is a small sliver of evidence pointing towards the general direction of…”
… but that isn’t true, which is the very reason for why they phrase it like that. The Trump administration didn’t invent the “paracetamol -> autism” hypothesis. There’s been papers published on it for years.
The state of the science is that there’s correlation, but not causation. Unfortunately the difference between those two things is a bit difficult to communicate to the general public.
Again the problem is how this is written … “no conclusive evidence” will be read as “There is a small sliver of evidence pointing towards the general direction of…”
It should say “There is no evidence of… at all”.
… but that isn’t true, which is the very reason for why they phrase it like that. The Trump administration didn’t invent the “paracetamol -> autism” hypothesis. There’s been papers published on it for years.
The state of the science is that there’s correlation, but not causation. Unfortunately the difference between those two things is a bit difficult to communicate to the general public.
Exactly this… I’m so tired of shoddy “journalism”.