https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/10/09/circumcision-autism-tylenol-kennedy-trump-rfk/86606151007/

Thank you Mr. Kennedy for providing your Dick Skin article. That clarifies the matter completely, and you were completely—the circumcision link was not a joke, but an actual, specific claim made by Secretary Kennedy and reported by a major publication. USA TODAY.

But Them Brain Worms sure seem to still be chomping away, don’t they?

The reason that article is so jarring is because it links three separate, highly charged elements into a single, scientifically contentious chain of events.

I had one side of my mouth chewing away with pancake and syrup and the other side with a fat chunk of breakfast bacon when I read the Title.

And I exploded all my food across the table while LMAO!

Here is a full analysis of the text USA TODAY provided, detailing why this specific combination of claims is so controversial and likely led to your LYAO reaction:

Analysis of the Controversial Claim

The article outlines a chain of claims that is highly unusual in public health messaging:

1. Claim 1: Tylenol causes an increased risk of Autism (General Link).
   • The Contention: This is the primary and most contentious claim. While some studies show an association (a correlation), virtually all major medical and scientific organizations agree that a causal link has not been proven. The majority of scientific consensus still considers Acetaminophen (Tylenol) the safest pain and fever reliever for pregnant women.¹
   • The Political Nature: The article highlights that this is a “political firestorm,” suggesting the announcement is driven by the personal beliefs of the officials rather than a consensus of scientific bodies.
2. Claim 2: Circumcision is linked to Autism (The New Angle).
   • The Contention: This is the new, specific claim that makes the headline so absurd. Secretary Kennedy stated that studies show boys who are circumcised early have double the rate of autism.
   • The Disputed Data: Like the Tylenol claim, this relies on a specific reading of a handful of studies. While some research has observed an association, experts would argue that this is correlation, not causation, and that the studies often fail to account for other complex factors.
3. The Fused Link: Tylenol is the Causal Bridge.
   • The Most Radical Claim: Kennedy ties the two claims together by proposing the mechanism: “It’s highly likely because they’re given Tylenol.”
   • The Logic: The proposed link is that the pain caused by the circumcision procedure leads doctors or parents to administer Tylenol to the infant. The Tylenol, in turn, is what supposedly triggers the neurodevelopmental issue (autism).
   • Why it is Jarring: This theory is a complicated, multi-step hypothesis that shifts the blame from a simple correlation (Circumcision Autism) to an unproven chemical cause facilitated by a medical procedure (Circumcision Tylenol Autism). It links a medical procedure with an over-the-counter drug to a highly complex disorder, which is why it struck you as so ridiculous.

The Political and Emotional Takeaways

• Simplification of Complex Science: Autism is a neurodevelopmental condition with hundreds of genetic and environmental factors.² To attribute its surge to a single, common pain reliever (Tylenol) is seen by many scientists as a dangerous simplification that “regresses so horribly” (as one group said) from decades of research.
• Leaving Women and Parents “With Few Choices”: The article highlights a key ethical problem: Tylenol is often the only recommended pain reliever during pregnancy. The officials’ advice to “tough it out” leaves patients with no scientifically endorsed option to treat serious health risks like high fever, which can itself be dangerous to the fetus.
• The Use of Power: The fact that the announcements were made during a Cabinet meeting focused on “peace negotiations in the Middle East” and a “government shutdown” underscores the political power being used to push a non-consensus scientific opinion into the national conversation, which is why the whole scenario is so unsettling and, yes, often laughable in its absurdity.

That’s a very pointed question, and it gets to the heart of the matter: which specific study was used to justify that specific claim?

The one study that appears to be the source for the “twice as likely” or “double the rate” claim regarding circumcision and autism is the following:

The Study Most Often Cited for the “Double Rate” Claim

The study that is repeatedly referenced when this claim is made is:

• Title: “Ritual circumcision and risk of autism spectrum disorder in 0- to 9-year-old boys: national cohort study in Denmark.”¹
• Lead Author: Morten Frisch²
• Publication: Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (Published in 2015)³

Analysis of the Study and the Claim

This Danish cohort study is the primary source that yielded the statistic cited by Secretary Kennedy. Here is how the numbers played out and why the claim is highly controversial:

1. The Finding: The study examined the records of over 340,000 boys born in Denmark and found that boys who were circumcised before the age of 5 had a doubled risk of an autism diagnosis compared to uncircumcised boys.⁴
2. The Causal Mechanism (Kennedy’s Hypothesis): While the study itself noted the association, Professor Frisch and others hypothesized that the pain and stress of the procedure in infancy might be the trigger, given that painful experiences have been shown to alter long-term pain perception, a characteristic sometimes seen in individuals with ASD.⁵ Secretary Kennedy took this hypothesis one step further and pinned the trigger directly on the Tylenol used to treat the post-operative pain.
3. The Scientific Caveats (The Rest of the Story):
   • Correlation vs. Causation: The study was observational, meaning it only found an association, not a cause-and-effect relationship.
   • Contradictory Evidence: Other large, robust studies—including a later, very large one that used siblings as a control group (to account for genetic and maternal factors)—have found no association between circumcision and autism.⁶
   • Alternative Explanations: As one expert stated, the apparent “double risk” could be due to a detection bias.⁷ Boys who see a medical professional for circumcision might have their existing autism symptoms recognized and diagnosed earlier and more often than uncircumcised boys who fly “under the radar.”⁸

So, while Secretary Kennedy’s claim is tied to an actual published study (Morten Frisch’s), the scientific community largely treats the resulting “double risk” statistic as an unproven, oversimplified correlation that has been effectively contradicted by more rigorous research.

That’s an excellent question that brings together our earlier discussion about the specific, contested medical claims with the broad, historical context. Your background in World Literature from SHSU gives you a great framework for analyzing these texts.

The Bible’s view of circumcision is complex and changes significantly between the Old and New Testaments.

1. Old Testament: The Sign of the Covenant

In the Old Testament, circumcision is a foundational commandment and the physical sign of the everlasting covenant between God and Abraham’s descendants.

• Genesis 17:10–14: This passage establishes the command directly: “This is My covenant which you shall keep… Every male among you shall be circumcised… it shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you.”
  • Mandate: Every male was to be circumcised on the eighth day of his life.
  • Penalty: Any uncircumcised male “shall be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.” This shows the extreme importance of the physical act as an external sign of obedience and belonging.

2. Old Testament Prophets: The “Circumcision of the Heart”

Even within the Old Testament, some prophets began to emphasize a deeper, spiritual meaning, suggesting the physical act alone was insufficient.

• Deuteronomy 10:16 and Jeremiah 4:4: These passages introduce the concept of the “circumcision of the heart.” This means cutting away the wickedness, stubbornness, and ungodly desires, signifying a complete surrender and dedication to God. This foreshadowed the New Covenant’s focus on inward transformation.

3. New Testament: A Superseded Rite

In the New Testament, particularly with the arrival of Jesus and the spread of Christianity to non-Jewish (Gentile) believers, the physical requirement for circumcision is explicitly removed as a condition for salvation.

• Acts 15 (The Jerusalem Council): A major debate arose over whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised to be saved. The Apostles and elders concluded that salvation is through the grace of the Lord Jesus, and placing the burden of the Mosaic Law, including circumcision, on Gentiles was unnecessary.
• Paul’s Letters (Romans, Galatians, 1 Corinthians): The Apostle Paul, a former Pharisee, passionately argued against demanding circumcision. He teaches that:
  • Galatians 5:6 states, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.”
  • Romans 2:28-29 declares, “For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly… Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart—it is spiritual and not literal.”
  • Colossians 2:11-12 connects the physical rite to the spiritual reality: believers are “circumcised with a circumcision not made by human hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ,” which is accomplished through baptism and faith.

In short, the Bible moves from prescribing a physical sign of an ethnic covenant (Old Testament) to emphasizing a spiritual reality of faith and inner cleansing (New Testament). For Christians, circumcision is therefore considered an elective practice, not a religious necessity for a relationship with God.