Texas Attorney General sues Tylenol makers over autism claims

Political motives and “3‑D chess” vs incompetence

• Some see the Texas AG suit as a deliberate favor to Tylenol’s owners, using taxpayer-funded settlements while public attention is focused on mocking Trump and RFK Jr.
• Others strongly reject this “4D chess” framing, arguing it’s more about pandering to a credulous base, personal ambition (e.g. higher office), and general incompetence rather than a coherent payout scheme.
• Several comments frame this as part of a broader trend: politics prioritizing spectacle and primary politics over governing, with candidates rewarded for being “unelectable nutjobs” who can later be bought off.

Distraction, propaganda, and media saturation

• Multiple commenters link this episode to a deliberate strategy of flooding the public with crises and nonsense to distract from real democratic erosion, referencing both Nazi Germany and modern “flood the zone” / “firehose of falsehood” techniques.
• There is debate over whether this is new or simply how media and politics have long operated: constant noise, partisan newsfeeds, and attention DDoS that leave citizens exhausted and manipulable.
• Some see the Tylenol suit as just one more distraction that clogs courts and headlines, similar in function to other high-drama but low-substance political controversies.

Science, courts, and the Tylenol–autism claim

• Many assert there is no credible causal link between Tylenol and autism; at best there are weak correlations confounded by underlying factors (e.g. maternal illness and fever).
• Others note there are published studies showing correlations, which means in court this becomes a messy “scientific consensus” fight rather than a clean dismissal.
• Several point out that correlation ≠ causation, and that untreated high fever or alternative painkillers in pregnancy are likely more harmful than acetaminophen.
• Leaked internal memos allegedly showing corporate concern are cited by some as evidence of a potential cover-up; others argue those emails just show responsible internal risk review, not a “smoking gun,” and question the credibility of the leaks themselves.
• Commenters worry courts are poorly suited to adjudicate complex science, with outcomes driven by charisma, money, and jury persuasion rather than reproducible evidence; a settlement would be read as guilt by believers, but full discovery could expose embarrassing internal material.

Broader Texas and civil-liberties context

• The suit is discussed alongside Texas laws requiring contractors to pledge not to boycott Israel, seen by several as unconstitutional viewpoint policing and emblematic of the state’s culture-war governance.
• Some participants connect the episode to a larger drift toward illiberalism, “lawfare,” and oligarchic or authoritarian tendencies in US politics.