Woman Coerced Into Abortion Asks FDA To Stop Shielding Abusers And Their Drug Dealers
Markezich was 'so happy' when she became pregnant. Now, after her coerced abortion, the thought of her lost baby 'never really goes away.'The maker of Tylenol is fighting back against proposed changes to its label.
Kenvue, the American company behind Tylenol, says changes proposed by a recent petition would be "improper."
'Fight like hell not to take it.'
After the Trump administration linked the use of Tylenol during pregnancy to autism, the Informed Consent Action Network urged the FDA to "change the labels" for Tylenol and provide "crucial warnings for pregnant women and their care providers."
Kenvue responded directly to the petition in its own document and said that changing the labeling to its over-the-counter acetaminophen products in such a manner would be "unsupported by the scientific evidence and legally and procedurally improper."
Requesting that the consumer-facing warning addresses a risk between "acetaminophen use and neurodevelopmental disorders" would allegedly go against the "overwhelming weight of the evidence contradicts the existence of any such risk," Kenvue claimed.
The manufacturer called acetaminophen one of the "most studied medicines in history," with evidence regarding its use during pregnancy being "continuously evaluated by the FDA for more than a decade."
It further claimed that available evidence does not support "a causal association between acetaminophen use in pregnancy and neurodevelopmental disorders, including ASD and ADHD."
CNN reported that Tylenol generates about $1 billion annually for Kenvue and is considered to be its top-selling brand.
If the FDA agrees with ICAN's demand, Tylenol labels would need to be updated from its current instructions that say, "If pregnant or breast-feeding, ask a health professional before use."
President Trump had previously said during a press conference in September that if used during pregnancy, Tylenol was linked to a "very increased risk of autism."
"Fight like hell not to take it," Trump added.
RELATED: 'TrumpRx' website to offer discounted drugs as part of landmark Big Pharma deal

At the same time, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had begun its process to approve a treatment for autism-related symptoms.
The FDA announced in late September that it had approved leucovorin calcium tablets for patients with "cerebral folate deficiency."
The neurological condition affects folate transfer into the brain, the FDA said, adding that "individuals with cerebral folate deficiency have been observed to have developmental delays with autistic features."
"We have witnessed a tragic four-fold increase in autism over two decades," said FDA Commissioner Marty Makary. "Children are suffering and deserve access to potential treatments that have shown promise. We are using gold standard science and common sense to deliver for the American people."
According to the Mayo Clinic, leucovorin has a few side effects, all of which are listed as rare. These include skin rash, hives or itching, and wheezing. "Convulsions (seizures)" are also listed.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
There’s no link between antidepressant use and mass shootings, at least not according to a new study published in the journal Psychiatry Research.
Certainly good news for the pharmaceutical industry — but does one study really mean case closed?
The FDA’s own adverse event reporting system shows a consistent link between SSRIs and violence among adults.
It’s a controversial topic that has only become more so in recent years, especially now that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the secretary of health and human services under President Trump.
Kennedy has long maintained that antidepressants are causing mass shootings. In an interview with Elon Musk in 2023, for example, Kennedy said, “Prior to the introduction of Prozac [a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor], we had none of these events [mass shootings].”
In his confirmation hearings in February, he told the Senate that the link “should be studied, along with other possible culprits.”
He was asked to clarify his views about antidepressants and mass shootings by his Democrat interrogators, because they were intended to be discrediting just by being uttered aloud — just like his views on water fluoridation, vaccination, and the origins of COVID-19. A whole basket of deplorable ideas.
In short, we’re talking about yet another partisan political issue, even though, surely, we can all agree that mass shootings are terrible and we need to do everything we can to stop them.
And that includes, obviously, understanding what motivates the shooters.
The new study looked at over 800 mass-shooting incidents that took place between 1990 and 2023. The researchers used publicly available data — news reports, court records, and police statements — to see whether the perpetrators had any history of antidepressant or psychotropic drug use and whether there was a link between suicidality and mass shootings. Previous research had suggested there was such a link.
The researchers found evidence of lifetime antidepressant use in just 34 out of 852 cases and evidence of psychotropic drug use more broadly in 56 cases — just 6.6%. There was no unusual association between suicidality and mass shootings either. Suicide attempts were slightly more common among those with a history of medication use, but the difference was not statistically meaningful.
Population-level data also indicated that antidepressant use among mass shooters was lower than among the general public. If antidepressants were causing mass shootings, we’d expect levels of antidepressant use to be higher, not lower.
QED — or so the researchers believe.
“The vast majority of mass shootings have nothing to do with mental illness,” Ragy R. Girgis, one of the study authors, told medical news website PsyPost.
“The primary modifiable population-level risk factor for mass shootings is firearm availability.”
Prevent people from getting their hands on guns, prevent mass shootings. It’s that simple.
Or is it?
RELATED: Groomed for violence? The dark world of furries and transgenderism in America's classrooms

There’s a glaring problem: The data simply isn't good enough to allow any kind of firm conclusion to be reached. The writers at "PsyPost" do at least acknowledge there’s a serious problem, although it doesn’t stop them from trumpeting “new study finds no evidence” in their headline.
Here’s what "PsyPost" says about the reliability of the evidence on offer.
Data were collected from publicly available sources, such as news articles and online records. This approach may miss cases where medication use was not reported or was kept confidential. The study also could not determine whether medications were being taken as prescribed during the attack or whether the person had recently stopped taking them.
Data is often kept confidential, even in the most high-profile cases. Take the Columbine shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. At the time of the massacre, which claimed the lives of 14 people and left another 20 wounded, it was widely reported that Harris had been on the powerful new SSRI Luvox, generic name fluvoxamine. The New York Times claimed Harris had been rejected by Marine recruiters just five days before the attack for taking the drug.
There were suggestions that he had tried to go cold turkey as a result and that this might have affected his actions on that dreadful, bloody day. The Times noted that “patients taking Luvox are warned that if combined with other drugs, including alcohol, the drug can cause extreme agitation progressing to delirium, coma and death. The package also carries a warning about suicide.”
While officials said neither shooter had drugs or alcohol in his system at time of death, the coroner refused to say whether they had been tested for antidepressants, including Luvox.
And so we still don’t know, 26 years later, whether antidepressants played a role in the Columbine killings.
Thankfully, there are now some attempts to provide answers. Unsurprisingly, they’re coming from Republican politicians and red states.
Tennessee has become the first state in the U.S. to introduce mandatory screening for psychotropic drugs in mass killings, defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed. In every mass killing that takes place in Tennessee, a detailed toxicology report will be produced and made available to the public. Investigators will study drug interactions in the killer’s body — because drugs have different effects when used in combination, a fact that is poorly understood — and they’ll also consult with providers of mental health services if the killer was receiving treatment.
Here’s something we do know for sure. A clear, well-established link exists between SSRIs and all forms of violent behavior. A huge Swedish study from 2020 that looked at 250,000 people revealed a significant association between SSRI use and violent crime, especially among 15- to 24-year-olds and 25- to 35-year-olds. The study also showed that risk of violence remained elevated up to 12 weeks after discontinuation of the drugs. The FDA’s own adverse event reporting system shows a consistent link between SSRIs and violence among adults.
Instead of dismissing the possibility of a link between antidepressant use and mass shootings, we actually need to do some proper research. Gather data and interpret it objectively — meaning dispassionately, without imposing an ideological agenda that fixes the conclusions in advance.
I know that’s a tall order, given how emotional a subject mass murder is — especially mass murder of children — and how unwilling we all are to talk across the growing political divide, but that’s the scientific ideal, and that’s the only way we’re ever going to get to the truth.
As every first-year history undergraduate knows — and I was one, once upon a time — absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Let’s not get twisted. Lives are at stake.
President Donald Trump unveiled a new deal to drastically reform the pharmaceutical industry and reduce drug prices for consumers.
Trump announced that Pfizer would be heavily discounting some of its "most popular medications" and that all new medications introduced in the U.S. markets would be sold at the "reduced Most Favored Nation cost." Trump also revealed that these discounted drugs will be available for purchase on a federally operated "TrumpRx" direct-to-consumer website.
'The big winner of this deal clearly will be the American patient.'
"It's going to have a huge impact on bringing Medicaid costs down, like nothing else. ... Especially, low-income Americans will be helped so greatly," Trump said in the Oval Office Tuesday.
"This is a consequential moment for our country," press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a post on X. "Drug prices WILL be lower for everyday Americans, thanks to the negotiating prowess and determination of President Donald J. Trump. Democrats have been wanting to do this for decades. The Trump Administration has delivered."
RELATED: Health organizations attacking Trump's Tylenol-autism claims are cozied up with Big Pharma
pic.twitter.com/WGVNZLGsZS
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) September 30, 2025
Trump initially issued an executive order in May that directed drug companies to offer the "most-favored-nation" price for American patients. If they failed to do so, the Department of Health and Human Services would make a rule to implement the policy, and the Food and Drug Administration would revoke approvals for drugs that may be "unsafe, ineffective, or improperly marketed."
Trump also wrote to over a dozen major pharmaceutical CEOs in July demanding that the manufacturers voluntarily extend the "most-favored-nation" pricing to all medicines provided to Medicaid recipients. Trump gave these companies until Monday to formally respond.
"If you refuse to step up, we will deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families from continued abusive drug pricing practices," Trump wrote.
So far, Eli Lilly pledged to raise prices in Europe in order to lower costs in the United States. Bristol-Myers Squibb similarly plans to charge the same list price for a new schizophrenia treatment in both the United States and United Kingdom.
RELATED: Who is bankrolling the anti-MAHA movement?

"The big winner of this deal clearly will be the American patient. There's no doubt about it," Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said during the press conference. "They are the ones that will see significant impact in their ability to buy medicines."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!