James Walker, a professor emeritus of obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of Leeds, said the research had helped to “cut through the noise” regarding recent concerns regarding whether medications taken by mothers during pregnancy could affect their babies.

“The practical message is straightforward” Walker said. “Women with moderate or severe depression should not stop their antidepressants in pregnancy out of fear of causing autism or ADHD. Depression that goes untreated in pregnancy carries real risks of its own, for the mother, the pregnancy and for the developing baby, including a higher chance of premature birth, postnatal depression and difficulties bonding with the baby. For milder depression, talking therapies and other non-medication approaches are usually tried first, in line with current guidelines. As always, decisions in pregnancy are personal and should be made with a clinician who knows the woman’s history.”

all 63 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 28 points 6 months ago (22 children)

Have we even found a single link between habits/conditions of pregnancy and ADHD/autism yet? I feel like every time I hear these stories, it’s a repeat of the last study’s findings.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    honestly the idea of autism being caused by something seems fucking insane, it's like saying red hair is caused by smoking while pregnant, what the fuck

    like it's just kind of obscene ableism, isn't it? At least since people are constantly saying "causes" and "risk" as if having autism or ADHD is a terrible disease that we need to cure, rather than an inherent part of who you are that society has a moral obligation to accomodate.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago

    A substantial body of evidence links maternal infection during pregnancy to adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in offspring. Large national registry studies have reported increased risks of neuropsychiatric disease such as autism spectrum disorder, cognitive delay, schizophrenia, and mood disorders after in utero exposure to maternal infections.

    Links: https://journals.lww.com/greenjournal/fulltext/2026/01000/neurodevelopmental_outcomes_of_3_year_old_children.4.aspx

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27287966/

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    I want to see a modern study on cigerette smoking.

    When I was a kid (early 90s), my mom defended her decision to not stop smoking when she was pregnant with me, by quoting a study from the 1970s. They found it did not cause any ill effects.

    Well around 2005 I was poking around the internet, and found that yes, that study was reported exactly how she claimed, and was performed by the Nixon administration.

    It was also funded by Marlborrow. So take that study with a salt mine worth of salt.

    I want a new modern independant study done. Because my mom never stopped, and I have always felt like something is wrong with me, but I'm too dumb to put it into words. I'm not calling it autism, but it feels like there's a mental blockade preventing me from being me. I don't know how to explain it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    what study was that? i have a hunch that it said less than you think. by 1964 there was a surgeon general's report and meta-analysis that showed smoking had lots of ill effects on the smoker including "low birth weight" and the 1979 report and meta-analysis found "The more the mother smokes, the greater the baby's birth-weight reduction"

    check out https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44697/table/ch5.t1

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    I can't access this link but I may have been part of that study as a kid! My mother smoked almost all the way through her pregnancy with me and I went through a bunch of tests over about 10 years to see if it caused my allergies. I never got to see what the study actually said about it though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Cigarettes, alcohol, street drugs. Most other things are benign.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 6 months ago

    It's pretty obvious that there's a hereditary component to ADHD/autism. But it's one of those things that needs further study to prove and since it's difficult to test these medications on pregnant women, it takes longer.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -4 points 6 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    There is a correlation, which is why the Trump administration was pushing the dangerous idea that pregnant women should not use acetaminophen because it will give their children autism. It's not a causation though.

    Pregnant women are limited to only acetaminophen for reducing fevers and treating pain.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    This one is a meta study based on other studies, so I guess that's to be expected.
    Everything is a fucking meta study today, and IMO they are too often shit, because they generally try to account for variables that the original studies weren't made for.
    Ah well, it's probably going to get worse, because now we will be overwhelmed by meta studies that are made by AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    meta studies are the highest standard of evidence. when peer-reviewed, looking at old evidence in new lights is precisely what they're supposed to do, and there's no problem with that unless there's a response/refutal along those lines.

    i haven't seen them be at a higher frequency than usual either; in fact the latest data i could find shows it's slowed down since 2019: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11795965/figure/cesm70010-fig-0002/ (note that the data cutoff is May 2024)

    because now we will be overwhelmed by meta studies that are made by AI.

    Have we even found a single major-journal systematic review that was made by AI yet?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Do you even know what a meta study is? It is not just "this amount of research says this and this amount of research says that", the actually important and actual work that goes into a meta study is to point out weaknesses of the examined base studies to weigh their informative value on the meta study's topic.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    Duh! Everyone knows it's the vaccines that do that.

    Wait, or is it 5G? I get my conspiracies mixed up sometimes...

  • source
  • [+] -5 points 5 months ago* (39 children)
  • [–] [S] 7 points 5 months ago (38 children)

    A pregnant woman should listen to her doctor and not your opinion.

    Untreated depression and anxiety can be more harmful to both the woman and the fetus than the side effects of antidepressants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    And oh sweet Jesus is a severe mental health episode during pregnancy an absolute bitch to manage even inpatient. You take the stress of rapidly discontinuing a long term med then throw in pregnancy hormones and shit gets completely out of hand so fucking fast.

    THEN I can't even give a gotdamn antihistamine for anxiety let alone a benzo! Keep her at home on her perfectly fine and normal Prozac! idw no peripartum anything up in my face. Give me the normal crazy I actually have meds for jfc. I'm on like five different actual hard hitters myself like the ones you ACTUALLY can't take during pregnancy (one of the reasons I'm forgoing pregnancy entirely).

    If it's a choice between keeping them stable on an SSRI vs the risk of peripartum crisis I pick the SSRI any day. If anybody is this worried about SSRIs they need to look more into better women's health overall so they're less likely to need the SSRIs to begin with. Offer a better support BEFORE ripping out the currently functioning one.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 5 months ago* (36 children)

    Opinions should be taken into account and once given research for taking informed decisions.

    Medics have a 52% successful diagnosis rate, and most of that stems from patients being unable to recognize symptoms to confer them do medics. Let alone the knowledge and skill limitations of individual professionals.

    If you want to pack up a developing brain with mind-altering substancesdo it with yourself. Not even your own kid has to suffer for your poor decision making and choice of healthcare professionals.

    Because your "how would I Had known" or " science wasn't aware at the time" excuses for your victim kids will not make it my dude. Because common sense spelled it right there for you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 36 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago (34 children)

    That’s a lot of words to say you don’t trust women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 34 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago (33 children)

    Thats too few words for a strawman and projecting your shit on others lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago (32 children)

    You’re not worth any more of a reply than that frankly.

    Have the day you deserve ;)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (31 children)

    as if you could provide one. Im having a great day, thanks :*

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 5 months ago (30 children)

    Probably because you’re not a suicidal pregnant woman who has men telling her she should just die because the fetus is more important.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (29 children)

    There are ways to reduce depression without packing your blood with psychoactive substances that go directly to a developing brain.

    And again, reread my comment: information should be given for the right decisions to be made. If the mother still desires to use psychoactive substances for her own good after her research on the topic, her right. But she should know of the potential repercussions of her decisions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (28 children)

    And those options should be weighed between a woman and her doctor, not some rando on the internet who feels like they’re more authorized to speak on this than actual medical providers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (27 children)

    Did i wrote anywhere that i should be weighting the decision itself? wtf are you on? Maybe take some online course on lecture comprehension.

    You are here just trying to invalidate my opinion to include important factors within the frame of the decision making process, because you personally disagree with that.

    And trying to give weight to your invalidation with a strawman.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (26 children)

    Your opinion holds no weight between a pregnant woman and her doctor. Your opinion that women shouldn't take any medications and suffer throughout their pregnancy, science be damned, is harmful.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (25 children)

    You really have 0 lecture comprehension and are basically arguing against something you made up my dude.

    My opinion is my opinion, and its the problem of whomever reads it to take it into account or not.

    As I personally do not take your opinion for nothing of importance in this regard, as you're toxic and basically delusional at this point if not just malicious in trying to reframe what I said.

    Have a nice day, and please, don't forget to take your antidepressants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (24 children)

    Casually pushing that pregnant women should avoid antidepressents regardless of what their doctors advise isn't about lecture comprehension or debates.

    It's a dangerous statement that you've pushed here and it is literally just your uneducated opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (23 children)

    "Pushing"??? Again, go read again the comment, dont discuss with your personal projections.

    It's a dangerous statement that you've pushed here and it is literally just your uneducated opinion.

    You are now assuming my education and what I used to give my opinion?

    Can I ask you whats your degree field? Or if you have one to start with as to put on yourself the selfentitlement to have the right to judge my opinion?

    Because you're here feverishly fighting against my statements about psychoactive compounds chronically saturating the mother's bloodstream affecting the development of the child thats connected to that bloodstream for 9 months; and that this should be taken into account by the mother to inform herself of the potential repercussions of blindly taking said compounds.

    Your opinion is dangerous in itself, not to mention that pretending to take away the right people have to take informed decisions, based on your personal belief (and maybe experience, sadly). Who are you to take on yourself the right of what people have to know or not?

    I'm honestly really heavily doubting about not only your qualifications and background education here; since you're trying to invalidate basic biochemical processes caused by strong hormonal modulators that are proven to affect even already formed and developed brains; let alone the fetus neural tissue.

    Please have some reading here:

    • 25% to 30% of infants exposed to SSRI/SNRI in late pregnancy experience transient symptoms such as jitteriness, restlessness, rapid breathing, and altered muscle tone. https://fn.bmj.com/content/109/3/294

    • In utero SSRI exposure, interacting with the maternal mood, is associated with distinct epigenetic alterations. Specifically, neonates show increased DNA methylation, an epigenetic signature that has also been linked to alterations in birth weight. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4622680/

    • Alterations to the Fetal HPA Axis and Cortisol Levels: Infants prenatally exposed to SSRIs exhibit altered early programming of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) stress axis. This is demonstrated by significantly reduced early evening basal cortisol levels measured at three months of age when compared to unexposed infants. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4821181/

    • Prenatal SSRI exposure is associated with an early gray matter volume expansion in the amygdala and insula, as well as increased structural connectivity between these regions. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10469300/

    • Even after strictly adjusting for confounding variables, prenatal exposure to antidepressants is associated with decreases in gestational age and birth weight , alongside a modestly increased risk for moderate-to-late preterm birth. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9117424/

    You know that there are hundreds of neurological problems outside of ADHD and Autism don't you? And if not, please inform yourself before pushing people to decide what to take or not based on what you believe is important, because its probably the popular thing you're paying attention to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago* (5 children)

    Your original and unhelpful comment that pregnant women should not take antidepressents even when their doctor prescribes them was removed by a moderator already.

    Everything in pregnancy is lower risk vs higher risk, not no risk vs risk. Each pregnancy is different on top of that.

    Pregnant women shouldn't listen to your opinion. They should listen to their doctors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (4 children)

    I did not wrote that they shouldnt take antidepressants. I wrote that their effects should be taken into account and researched before taking them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago* (3 children)

    I still wouldn't recommend taking them. Antidepressants saturate the blood flow chronically, and having random neuroactive compounds going to the fetus thorough their whole development can't be good. Maybe not autism or ADHD but something else for sure.

    Here's your parent comment where you literally recommend NOT taking antidepressants even when doctors prescribe them to pregnant women.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (2 children)

    even when doctors prescribe them to pregnant women.

    Where is that? Stop arguing for things you imagine in your triggered mind my dude. It affects your wellbeing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (1 child)

    You're commenting on a study that is talking about antidepressants and their use during pregnancy. You advised women to not take them regardless of how safe and effective they can be.

    You're wrong and women should work with their doctors on treatment plans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago*

    regardless of how safe and effective they can be.

    Your post's study only refers to ADHD and Autism. It doesnt imply safety for anything else. You are implying safety and effectiveness for the whole, based on two specifics. That is dangerous.

    Its like telling someone to drink a hepatoxic compound, because it doesn't hurt other organs.

    You're wrong

    As per your uneducated opinion.

    women should work with their doctors on treatment plans.

    Of course they should.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (16 children)

    Your opinion is dangerous in itself, not to mention that pretending to take away the right people have to take informed decisions, based on your personal belief (and maybe experience, sadly). Who are you to take on yourself the right of what people have to know or not?

    The only fucking opinion I've expressed here is that a pregnant woman should consult her doctor and listen to her doctor over random people's opinions on the internet.

    Why that's so controversial to you, who the fuck knows. I suspect that you had your ego bruised when your comment was removed and you have a woman pushing back on you.

    Pregnant women should listen to their doctors

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (15 children)

    Its controversial to you. Since if you had read my comments you would be aware that I never stated the contrary.

    But you're some random triggered toxic lemmy user with zero lecture comprehension, just arguing with imaginary statements and little context knowledge it seems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (14 children)

    I still wouldn't recommend taking them. Antidepressants saturate the blood flow chronically, and having random neuroactive compounds going to the fetus thorough their whole development can't be good. Maybe not autism or ADHD but something else for sure.

    Yes you fucking did.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (13 children)

    Thats my personal opinion, and the basis for that opinion (with some links provided a couple comments above, since seems that "common sense" isn't as common as one would hope).

    There isn't any "pushing" for ignoring medical advice or opinion, nor any imperative statements on the requirement of avoiding taking them .

    Again, you're arguing with imaginary projected things here, and are a supertoxic person on top of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago* (12 children)

    Your opinion on this is dangerous to spread online, which is a big part of why that comment was removed to begin with.

    Pregnant women should listen to and work with their doctors, not take any advice like this from a person like you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (11 children)

    Your opinion is dangerous to spread online, and toxic on top of that.

    Pregnant women should listen to and work with their doctors,

    They surely have to.

    And who people take advice from is their problem, not yours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (10 children)

    My opinion is that pregnant women should listen to their doctors and not you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (9 children)

    Your opinion is as irrelevant as mine. Do yourself a favor, and do some reading before trying to judge what others say on things that go well over your head.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (8 children)

    Advising women to not take antidepressents after their doctor has prescribed them makes your opinion significantly worse than anyone's here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (7 children)

    Where did I stated that women should not take antidepressants after their doctor has prescribed them?

    stop arguing with your imaginary self.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (6 children)

    Pregnant women taking antidepressants have a prescription from their doctor. You advised against taking them regardless.

    I'm done arguing about pancakes and waffles with you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (5 children)

    Where did said that women taking antidepressant should stop taking them?

    You are arguing with your own imaginary pancakes and waffles

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    I still wouldn't recommend taking them. Antidepressants saturate the blood flow chronically, and having random neuroactive compounds going to the fetus thorough their whole development can't be good. Maybe not autism or ADHD but something else for sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago* (2 children)

    Maybe one more time since your reading abilities are apparently hindered.

    I still wouldn't recommend taking them. Antidepressants saturate the blood flow chronically, and having random neuroactive compounds going to the fetus thorough their whole development can't be good. Maybe not autism or ADHD but something else for sure.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    I still wouldn't recommend taking them. Antidepressants saturate the blood flow chronically, and having random neuroactive compounds going to the fetus thorough their whole development can't be good. Maybe not autism or ADHD but something else for sure.

    Here it is again, just to be sure you got it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • 1 comment in c/science@beehaw.org view that post
    [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    Gee it’s almost like this is not a modern issue but rather a condition that has always existed and only become seriously problematic recently due to the narrowing of type of work and accomplishments that are valued in a modern economy. Almost like the issue isn’t people who have all these mental health conditions, but rather an economy designed to only be suitable for a fairly small number of personality types.

  • source