Trump’s Health Claims Span Acetaminophen, COVID-19, Climate and Vaccines
A review of the former president’s statements on health, vaccines and climate shows a pattern of disputed or debunked claims spanning years.

President Donald Trump on Monday urged pregnant women not to take acetaminophen, saying the common pain reliever is linked to a markedly increased risk of autism. The claim was offered without new supporting evidence and drew swift pushback from medical experts. Leading health organizations have rejected a causal link between acetaminophen use during pregnancy and autism, noting that when used as directed, acetaminophen is safe for most pregnant people and is the only over-the-counter fever reducer approved for use during pregnancy. Experts say untreated fever and pain can pose risks to both mother and fetus, making proper use important.
In the same remarks, Trump touched on other health topics, including the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines, reiterating a number of previously disputed or unverified claims. In July 2020, he asserted that 99% of COVID-19 cases were totally harmless, a statement that public-health data at the time showed to be inaccurate. In October 2020, he compared the virus to the flu, asking whether the country should close down or learn to live with COVID-19, a stance that experts argued underplayed the virus’s severity. He also promoted several unproven or dangerous treatment ideas, including the notion of injecting disinfectants or exposing patients to ultraviolet light. In March 2020, he touted chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as potential treatments, while public health officials warned that there was no proven drug to treat the virus and that the antimalarial drugs could have serious side effects.
On climate change, Trump has repeatedly cast doubt on the science and has framed its status as a political debate. In April 2022 he called climate change a hoax, and the following year described it as one of the greatest con jobs ever. Scientists say human-generated greenhouse gas emissions are driving long-term warming, even as cold-weather events can occur briefly in a warming world. Trump has also pushed for expanding fossil-fuel production and has criticized renewable energy, including making unsubstantiated claims about wind-turbine noise causing cancer.
Vaccine policy has also figured prominently in Trump’s public remarks. After taking office, he indicated openness to changing the childhood vaccination schedule and suggested there might be a link between vaccines and autism—a claim that is widely discredited by the scientific community. In a TIME interview marking the magazine’s Person of the Year for 2024, he said the autism rate is higher than expected and that there could be a cause worth studying, without explicitly stating vaccines cause autism. Earlier this month, he posted a video promoting the debunked link, and at a recent event he suggested that some groups do not take vaccines or pills that have no autism, without providing evidence. The consensus among medical organizations remains that vaccines do not cause autism.
On abortion, Trump has repeated claims that fetuses are killed just before birth or that babies are killed after birth. Public health data show that abortions later in pregnancy are rare; the CDC reports that in 2021 fewer than 1% of abortions occurred after 21 weeks. On gender-affirming care, he signed an executive order that labeled such care as chemical and surgical mutilation and claimed it rests on junk science. Major medical groups, including the American Medical Association, support gender-affirming care for those who seek it and oppose efforts to restrict access, saying care is evidence-based and medically necessary in many cases.
The timeline of these statements reflects a pattern in which health and science topics have repeatedly featured in Trump’s public messaging. Public-health experts warn that mischaracterizations about drugs, vaccines, and climate science can influence public behavior and erode trust in medical guidance. While Trump’s rhetoric has varied across issues and years, the underlying theme in these episodes is a tension between political messaging and mainstream scientific consensus.