The virtually complete loss of intestinal worms, known as helminths, from Western society has resulted in elimination of a range of helminth-induced morbidities. Unfortunately, that loss has also led to inflammation-associated deficiencies in immune function, ultimately contributing to widespread pandemics of allergies, autoimmunity, and neuropsychiatric disorders. Several socio-medical studies have examined the effects of intentional reworming, or self-treatment with helminths, on a variety of inflammation-related disorders. In this study, the latest results from ongoing socio-medical studies are described. The results point toward two important factors that appear to be overlooked in some if not most clinical trials. Specifically, (a) the method of preparation of the helminth can have a profound effect on its therapeutic efficacy, and (b) variation between individuals in the effective therapeutic dosage apparently covers a 10-fold range, regardless of the helminth used. These results highlight current limits in our understanding of the biology of both hosts and helminths, and suggest that information from self-treatment may be critical for clinical evaluation of the benefits and limits of helminth therapy.

The virtually complete loss of intestinal worms, known as helminths, from Western society has resulted in elimination of a range of helminth-induced morbidities. Unfortunately, that loss has also led to inflammation-associated deficiencies in immune function, ultimately contributing to widespread pandemics of allergies, autoimmunity, and neuropsychiatric disorders. Several socio-medical studies have examined the effects of intentional reworming, or self-treatment with helminths, on a variety of inflammation-related disorders. In this study, the latest results from ongoing socio-medical studies are described. The results point toward two important factors that appear to be overlooked in some if not most clinical trials. Specifically, (a) the method of preparation of the helminth can have a profound effect on its therapeutic efficacy, and (b) variation between individuals in the effective therapeutic dosage apparently covers a 10-fold range, regardless of the helminth used. These results highlight current limits in our understanding of the biology of both hosts and helminths, and suggest that information from self-treatment may be critical in moving the field forward into mainstream medicine.

Acetaminophen use during pregnancy and early childhood was accepted in the 1970s, but is now a subject of considerable concern. Careful analysis shows that initial acceptance of the drug was based on false assumptions and ignorance of the impact of the drug on brain development. Fourteen studies now indicate that prenatal exposure to acetaminophen is associated with neurodevelopmental problems. Based on corrections for confounding factors applied to the analyses of available data, it can be concluded that prenatal exposure to acetaminophen causes statistically significant risks of one subtype of autism spectrum disorder (ASD), developmental delays, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In contrast, data regarding postnatal exposure to acetaminophen are limited, and several factors impede a classic multivariate analysis of data to resolve the issue. However, circumstantial evidence regarding postnatal exposure to the drug is abundant, and it can be concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that postnatal exposure to acetaminophen in susceptible children is responsible for many if not most cases of ASD. Circumstantial evidence includes at least three otherwise unexplained temporal relationships, data from laboratory animal studies, several miscellaneous and otherwise unexplained correlations, and the lack of alternative suspects that fit the evidence-derived profile.

Background: Although widely believed to be safe for use in infants and children when used as directed, increasing evidence indicates that early life exposure to paracetamol (acetaminophen) may cause long-term neurodevelopmental problems. Further, recent studies in animal models demonstrate that cognitive development is exquisitely sensitive to paracetamol exposure during early development. In this study, evidence for the claim that paracetamol is safe was evaluated using a systematic literature search. Methods: Publications on PubMed between 1974 and 2017 that contained the keywords “infant” and either “paracetamol” or “acetaminophen” were considered. Of those initial 3096 papers, 218 were identified that made claims that paracetamol was safe for use with infants or children. From these 218, a total of 103 papers were identified as sources of authority for the safety claim. Results and Conclusions: A total of 52 papers contained actual experiments designed to test safety, and had a median follow-up time of 48 hours. None monitored neurodevelopment. Further, no trial considered total exposure to drug since birth, eliminating the possibility that the effects of drug exposure on long-term neurodevelopment could be accurately assessed. On the other hand, abundant and sufficient evidence was found to conclude that paracetamol does not induce acute liver damage in babies or children when used as directed.

Evidence that early life exposure to acetaminophen causes neurodevelopmental injury in susceptible children has mounted for more than a decade. Evidence is diverse, including extensive work with laboratory animals, otherwise unexplained associations, factors associated with the metabolism of acetaminophen, and some limited studies in humans. Although evidence has reached an overwhelming level and has been reviewed in detail recently, some controversy remains. In this narrative review, some of those controversies are evaluated. First, the associations through time between acetaminophen use and the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders are considered. A systematic review reveals that the use of acetaminophen in the pediatric population was never tracked carefully, but historical events that affected use of the drug were documented and are sufficient to establish apparent correlations with changes in the prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders. Second, problems with exclusive reliance on results from meta-analyses of large datasets and from studies involving small time frames of drug exposure are reviewed. Third, the potential bias in a study designed to separate the role of vaccines and acetaminophen in the induction of autism spectrum disorder (Autism 2008;12:293-307) is carefully evaluated. Finally, evidence demonstrating why some children are susceptible to acetaminophen-induced neurodevelopmental injury is examined. It is concluded that, at least among the factors considered, there is no valid rationale for controversy regarding the conclusion that early life exposure to acetaminophen causes neurodevelopmental injury in susceptible babies and small children.

A growing body of literature suggests a causative relationship between severe adverse neurological outcomes and early life exposure to paracetamol (acetaminophen) in the presence of oxidative stress. Review of the literature revealed that, although its use is not regularly monitored, paracetamol has achieved near universal acceptance, with exposure in some pediatric populations exceeding 90%. In addition, use of the drug as well as associated adverse outcomes may have risen as a result of pharmaceutical advertising rather than need, and inappropriate use of the drug, both in terms of dose and indication, is widespread. These findings indicate that many clinicians and patients do not, at the present time, evenly weigh the potential risks with the potential benefits of paracetamol exposure early in life. Although retrospective studies might be envisioned to further address the neurodevelopmental risks of paracetamol use during early development, in silico simulations demonstrated that such studies can be thwarted by very high rates of use of the drug combined with associations between paracetamol use and oxidative stressors that act as cofactors in the induction of neurodevelopmental injury. These findings suggest that, despite persistent uncertainty, clinicians and patients should be more aware of available information pointing toward the potential dangers for neurodevelopment of early life exposure to paracetamol. Most importantly, health care workers need to provide a more balanced view, weighing both risks and benefits, when providing advice for patients regarding paracetamol use during periods of brain development.