IF INNER FITNESS | Special Chapter - Allergies, Autism, ADHD, and A Partridge in a Pair Tree.

Our IF Inner Fitness journey continues with a special added chapter. This chapter and all chapters are copyrighted, 1999 - 2025.

Allergies, Autism, ADHD, and A Partridge in a Pair Tree.

About a year ago, I wrote an article and also filmed a video (YouTube@phrog-fitness) about the idea of banning certain foods. The latest target or victim, was Twinkies, which I suppose just barely qualifies as food. I only skimmed the surface of food additives, processed foods, vaccines, medications, environment, and other possible contributors to allergies, autism, and ADHD.

These topics really get people fired up, so let’s work through these ideas, one by one, step by step using research, logic, and reason.

These topics are in the news lately and there is a lot of ongoing confusion, controversy and debate. My goal here is to share the most up to date data and research and present it in a way that should not be controversial, but rather enlightening and motivate you to ask your own logical questions and seek your own logical answers.

Ok. So all that being said, let’s start with Allergies and slowly build to the current raging Autism Tylenol debate.

Peanuts:
Peanuts never seemed to be an issue when I was a kid and I never heard or knew about any kids who had peanut allergies. Literally, EVERY kid I grew up with lived on peanut butter & jelly sandwiches, peanut butter and marshmallow fluff sandwiches, and peanut butter and banana sandwiches. My grandfather even introduced me to the idea of putting peanut butter on apples. I know! Sounds crazy, but it is awesome.
Peanuts were once beloved and now peanuts have become enemy number one.

I’m surprised there’s not a peanut most wanted poster up at every post office.

God-forbid you send your child to school with anything made with, baked with or containing peanuts. Peanuts are strictly forbidden.

I was on a flight recently and over the loudspeaker the flight attendant announced that they would not be serving snacks or food on our flight because someone on board had a severe peanut allergy. What?! 

What is going on?

So, let’s start with peanuts are not actually nuts. They are legumes, (beans). They are high in protein, but higher in fat. For their size, they also have a lot of calories and good health qualities, so eaten in moderation, peanuts “can” play an important and positive role in providing both good nutrition and energy. Good food for going on a long hike. In recent years, peanuts like many other foods have gotten a bad reputation as an allergen. As I said, they have been banned in schools and even on flights.

Ok. Here’s an interesting fact. Peanut allergies are present globally, and here’s a breakdown of worldwide percentages:

Global average:

Children
Around 1 in 50 children (2%) are estimated to have a peanut allergy.

Adults
Approximately 1 in 200 adults (0.5%) have a peanut allergy.

By Nation:

Another interesting fact. Western developed countries have the highest number of cases:

North America, (USA & Canada), Europe, and Australia have the highest rates, with estimates ranging from 1 to 3% for children and 0.5 to 1% for adults.

Israel
Among Jewish children, the numbers can be as high as 7.3%.

The lowest are East and Southeast Asia
Peanut allergies are less common. From 0.08% to 0.5% in children and 0.1% to 0.3% in adults.

Also low in Africa
Around 0.1% for both children and adults.

Breakdowns by race:

In the United States, African American children have a higher chance of peanut allergies (1.4%) compared to Caucasian children (0.8%).

Asian and Hispanic children have a lower chance compared to both African American and Caucasian children.

Worldwide Increase:

A global increase in peanut allergies, mostly in developed countries. This trend is likely due to many possible factors.

Note:

There is a global increase in illness, heart disease, cancer, and autism as well.

Why do so many kids and adults have peanut allergies? Here are a few theories, (ideas).

Hygiene Theory:

The “Hygiene” theory suggests that children who have less exposure to germs and certain infections at a very young age develop immune systems that are over-sensitive and more likely to misidentify harmless substances, like peanut proteins, as threats, triggering allergic reactions.

Not bad. This seems to make some sense. I spent my youth playing in the dirt and even eating dirt and most kids today spend their days on their phones or computers.

Changes in agricultural practices:

Increased use of pesticides and fertilizers in peanut farming may alter the protein structure in peanuts, making them more allergenic.

Not bad. Also seems to make sense, not just for peanuts but many foods we eat.

Genetic Predisposition:

Some people have a genetic predisposition, (genetic) to developing allergies, including peanut allergies. A family history of allergies increases the risk.

This doesn’t make as much sense to me. If there were only a few cases of people being allergic, this might make more sense, but there are mass numbers of people developing food allergies, and clear global patterns. Genetic mutations take many years.

Delayed Introduction of Peanut Protein to Infants:

Previously, the advice was to delay introducing peanut products to babies, which may have inadvertently contributed to the rise in allergies.

Maybe. Not as strong of a theory.

Changes in Food processing:

Increased Processing.

Modern food production relies heavily on processing, which can alter the structure and composition of food proteins. This can make them more allergenic, meaning they are more likely to trigger an immune response in susceptible individuals.

This also seems to make sense.

Use of Additives:

Food additives are widely used to enhance flavor, texture, color, and shelf life. However, some additives, such as preservatives, artificial colors, and artificial flavors, have been linked to an increased risk of food allergies.

Also seems to make sense.

Homogenization of the Food Supply:

The modern food supply is more homogenized than ever before, with people consuming a narrower range of food varieties. This lack of diversity in dietary intake may contribute to allergies by limiting exposure to different types of food proteins, leading to less tolerance, and potentially triggering an immune response.

Also seems to make sense.

Changes in Gut Microbiome:

Gut microbiome plays an important role in the development and function of our immune system. Changes in the gut microbiome due to factors such as diet and antibiotics (and over use) may contribute to an increased risk of allergies.

This also seems to make sense.

Environmental Factors:

Environmental factors such as air pollution and exposure to chemicals may also play a role in the development of allergies.

Again. Also seems to make sense.

Increased Awareness:

Improved diagnostic tools and greater awareness of food allergies may contribute to the perception that peanut allergies are becoming more common.

Again. Maybe plays a part but doesn’t explain “real physical daily life” data. In other words, children and adults ARE having REAL allergic reactions and attacks, which have not been witnessed in the past.

Dual Allergen Exposure Theory:

This theory suggests that the development of allergies depends on the timing, dose, and form of exposure to the allergen. Repeated exposure to small amounts of peanut protein may help prevent allergies, while large or infrequent exposures may increase the risk.

This doesn’t seem to be a theory which answers the question of why food allergies and why now and not before. Timing, dose, and form all make sense in the context of “How” but does not address “Why”.

Vaccines & Medications:

The relationship between vaccines & medications, and food allergies. This of course is the most debated and controvercial of all the theories. Yup! I said the “V” word.

According to the same health organizations and sources, they list the following under “Supporting a potential association”. 

Temporal Association Studies or Pattern Association Over Time:

Studies have observed an increase in food allergies together with an increase in vaccination rates and use of medications (over use), particularly in developed countries. However, this could be due to other factors, such as changes in eating habit, changes to food production, and environmental exposures.

Seems to make sense.

Part 1:

Fact: “There is an increase in food allergies alongside vaccination rates, specifically in developed countries, (where humans are receiving a high number of vaccinations). 

Part 2: “This could be due to other factors, such as changes in eating - food habits and exposure to different environments”.

Animal Studies:

Some research in animals suggests that vaccines may trigger immune responses that could potentially contribute to the development of allergies. However, these findings may not translate directly to humans.

Ok. Not bad. Seems to also make sense. This is true. Findings may not translate to humans.

Case reports

There have been rare case reports of food allergies developing shortly after vaccination. However, these cases are not necessarily causal and could be due to other factors, such as coincidental timing or underlying allergic tendencies.

Maybe. Not as strong of a theory. True. Findings are not necessarily causal, (no clear link).

According to the same health organizations and sources, they list the following under Contradicting a potential association:

Large-scale studies:

Several large-scale studies have found no association between the number of vaccines received and the risk of food allergies.

Seems to directly contradict the “Temporal Studies”.

Ok. So, the first thing I do when performing my own research is go directly to the studies. I don’t take the headlines or even the articles at face value. ANY study can be manipulated and most have a built-in bias. Where are these studies? How were these studies conducted? How many people were involved in the study? What were the study perimeters? Etc. Etc. Etc.

Biological Studies:

The biological, (genetic) means by which vaccines might directly cause food allergies is not fully understood.

This doesn’t make as much sense because it’s just a statement about “not knowing something”.

Alternative Explanations:

Other factors, such as genetics, environmental exposures, and changes in gut microbiome, are known to play a significant role in the development of food allergies.

Again. This isn’t evidence stating that vaccines are not the issue. This is just saying that “other things may be the issue.” You will see the same type of thought process when discussing autism and ADHD. Keep in mind that just because one thing could cause something, doesn’t eliminate other things from also contributing or also causing the same thing.

Cancer is a good example, and I’ll use this example again while discussing autism. Smoking causes cancer. So does that mean that exposure to chemicals, genetics or exposure to radiation does not cause cancer? No. Of course not.

Summary:

Where does all of this leave us? Well without question, many more studies are required. But, based on what is known, using reason and logic, the theories/reasons for increased food allergies which so far, seem to make the most sense and deserve more attention and research are:

- Hygiene Theory

- Changes in agricultural practices

- Changes in Processing

- Vaccines / Medications

Autism and Tylenol (Acetaminophen)

Research going back at least to 2013 has suggested a possible association between acetaminophen (Tylenol) use late in pregnancy and an increased risk of autism or ADHD in children. The debate centers not on whether studies exist, but on how strong this association really is. Still, the body of independent research has been significant enough that both government agencies and manufacturers have urged caution.

As Reuters reported in 2013: “Too much Tylenol in pregnancy could affect development. Too much frequent use towards the end of pregnancy may be linked to poor language skills and behavior problems among children.”

This doesn’t mean Tylenol has been banned. Instead, health officials emphasize caution: “Be aware of possible links under study, and always consult your doctor before use.” Even the product labels reflect this: “Talk to your doctor before taking during pregnancy.”

Part of the issue is that Tylenol was never formally tested on pregnant women prior to approval. The FDA has long acknowledged the ethical and logistical barriers to such studies. As National Health Director Dr. Bhattacharya explained: “It would be incredibly difficult, and probably unethical, to test a drug on pregnant women. So the manufacturer is obligated to state—as they did in 2017—that they cannot recommend Tylenol during pregnancy, because its safety has not been demonstrated to FDA standards.”

The key point is often misunderstood. Officials are not claiming that Tylenol is the cause of autism or ADHD. Rather, they are noting that evidence suggests it could be one contributing factor, among others. The responsible position is transparency:

- Continue research, share potential risks, and allow families to make informed decisions in consultation with their doctors.

Why People Use Acetaminophen

Acetaminophen (Tylenol) is one of the most widely used medicines for everyday pain and fever. It works mainly in the brain:

- It lowers how strongly the brain senses pain signals.

- It resets the body’s “thermostat” to bring down a fever.

- It doesn’t irritate the stomach like aspirin or ibuprofen, and it doesn’t thin the blood.

- For most healthy adults, it’s considered safe when used as directed.

Why Pregnancy Changes the Picture?

When a pregnant woman takes acetaminophen, the drug easily crosses into the baby’s body through the placenta. Both the baby’s liver and brain are still developing and don’t yet have strong systems to break down toxins or protect against damage.

Normally, the adult liver turns most of the drug into harmless byproducts. But a small fraction becomes a toxic byproduct called NAPQI. In adults, the liver neutralizes NAPQI quickly. In a fetus, the detox system isn’t as strong, so NAPQI can remain longer. This may cause oxidative stress (chemical damage) and disrupt sensitive brain development processes.

That’s why researchers are concerned that frequent or long-term acetaminophen use late in pregnancy could raise the risk of ADHD or autism. Let me stress again, three important points. “Frequent”, “Long Term”, and “Late in Pregnancy”. Got it?

Once inside the body, acetaminophen (Tylenol) gets broken down into smaller chemicals. Some of these byproducts can interfere with the way the brain develops by:

- Disrupting chemical signals the brain uses to grow and connect properly.

- Affecting the baby’s stress and immune systems in the brain.

- Creating oxidative stress (a kind of chemical “rusting” that can harm cells).

Animal and lab studies show these disruptions can affect how brain cells form connections and communicate. There are independent large scale scientific studies that also show that frequent or long-term use of acetaminophen late in pregnancy is linked to higher chances of ADHD and, in some cases, autism.

These studies don’t prove cause and effect, but the biology makes the link plausible. That’s why health officials say it’s important to be careful, keep doses low and occasional, and always check with a doctor before using Tylenol late in pregnancy.

Common Criticisms — and Why They Fall Short.

Whenever the risks of acetaminophen (Tylenol) in pregnancy are raised, a few criticisms repeatedly come up. Unfortunately the same oppositions often arise when debating food allergies and the use of medications (other pharmaceuticals).

The statement of opposition:

“Autism existed before Tylenol, so Tylenol can’t cause it.”

This is a weak argument. Autism and ADHD almost certainly have multiple causes — environment, toxins, possibly vaccines and medications, foods, and other unknowns. Pointing out that autism existed before Tylenol is like saying, “People got cancer before cigarettes existed, so smoking can’t cause cancer.” Of course cancer has many causes, but smoking is still one of them. The same logic applies here: Acetaminophen could be one contributing factor among many.

Politics Over Science:

Some critics seem less concerned with the evidence and more focused on rejecting whatever a particular administration says. That’s ideology, not science. The warnings about acetaminophen in pregnancy aren’t political statements and they have been there through other administrations — they’re a reflection of emerging evidence, cautious guidance, and transparency.

The Role Of Money:

Acetaminophen is a multi-billion-dollar product, and big pharmaceutical companies and their investors have a lot at stake. Major media outlets, often tied to these industries through advertising, also shape how the story gets told. It’s not surprising that financial interests might downplay risks. The potential loss of revenue doesn’t erase the scientific questions that deserve attention.

Folate, Autism, and Another Layer of Debate.

Alongside the discussion about acetaminophen, some researchers are looking at nutrition — especially folate (vitamin B9). Folate is essential during pregnancy because it helps the baby’s brain and nervous system develop. That’s why prenatal vitamins usually contain folic acid, a synthetic form of folate.

Recent studies suggest that low folate levels in pregnancy may increase the risk of autism in children. In response, some doctors and public health officials are suggesting that women get more folate, either through diet, supplements, or more recently through a prescription medication designed to boost folate levels.

Not surprisingly, this has stirred up even more criticism. Some say the medical community is “shifting blame” from drugs like acetaminophen to nutrition. Others accuse pharmaceutical companies of using the science as a way to promote a new, and profitable folate-based drug.

The reality is that both things can be true:

Folate deficiency may play a role in autism risk, and acetaminophen exposure may also contribute. These are not mutually exclusive. Autism is complex, with many possible causes, and improving maternal nutrition while also being cautious with medications are both reasonable steps. Right? I think this is logical and reasonable.

Why Folate Levels May Have Been Higher in the Past.

As stated previously in the beginning of this article, diet (our foods) were less processed:

Forty-plus years ago, people generally ate fewer processed foods and more whole foods — leafy greens, legumes, liver, whole grains — all of which are naturally high in folate. Today, diets are more likely to be made up of refined foods, which contain less natural folate.

Soil quality was better:

Decades of industrial farming have reduced the nutrient density of many crops. Vegetables grown today often contain fewer vitamins and minerals, including folate, compared to those grown in the mid-20th century.

Fewer interfering factors:

Modern medications, toxins, electromagnetic exposure / pollution, and even lifestyle stress can affect how the body absorbs or uses folate. Forty years ago, exposure to some of these factors was lower.

And yet — here’s the paradox:

In the U.S., rates of autism diagnoses have gone up even though folic acid has been added to flour and cereals since the late 1990s. So women today may actually get more synthetic folic acid than in the past, at least on paper.

That’s why some researchers argue the picture is more complicated:

I started to think about this after speaking with my kidney stone surgeons. Maybe natural folate from food works differently than synthetic folic acid.

Maybe folate helps some risk factors (like neural tube defects) but doesn’t cancel out others (like acetaminophen exposure, toxins, or genetic susceptibility).

Or maybe folate deficiency is just one piece of a very large puzzle.

Natural vs. Synthetic Nutrients — Why It Matters.

Some critics point out that autism rates have risen despite folic acid fortification in foods since the late 1990s. If folate deficiency were the main factor, wouldn’t autism rates have gone down?

The answer may be that not all folate is the same. Natural folate from foods like leafy greens, beans, and organ meats is absorbed and processed differently than synthetic folic acid added to bread and cereals. Just as real dietary calcium seems to protect better against kidney stones than calcium pills (supplementation), food-based folate may support pregnancy in ways that supplements alone cannot fully match.

This suggests that nutrition is part of the story, but not the whole story. Autism risk is almost certainly shaped by a mix of factors — environment, medications, toxins, vaccines/inoculations, and nutrition (processed and “fake foods”. Folate may reduce risk, but it doesn’t erase the impact of other exposures, such as frequent acetaminophen use in late pregnancy and other possible causes.

Sources:

- National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/food-allergy

- Food Allergy Research & Education: https://www.foodallergy.org/

- American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology: https://acaai.org/

- Food Allergy Research & Education(FARE): https://www.foodallergy.org/resources/food-allergyfrequently-asked-questions-pdf.

- American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI: https://acaai.org/World Health Organization