By LAURA UNGAR

Faith Ayer had no qualms about taking Tylenol for chronic migraines and COVID-19 during her pregnancy, and grew disappointed and angry as she watched President Donald Trump rail against the pain medicine.

Related Articles

FACT FOCUS: A look at false and misleading claims made by Trump about autism, Tylenol and pregnancy

Trump administration designates Barrio 18 gang as foreign terrorist organization

Scientists rebuke Trump’s Tylenol-autism claim, stress fever is bigger danger in pregnancy

Trump says he now believes Ukraine can win back all territory lost to Russia with NATO’s help

Lowering the temperature: Tips for transcending our polarized politics

“A lot of the claims that were shared have just not been backed by evidence,” said Ayer, a nurse practitioner in Jacksonville, Florida, who is about 17 weeks pregnant with her first child. She said Trump’s words have implications “for patients across the country and even across the world.”

During a White House news conference on Monday, Trump repeatedly warned pregnant women not to take Tylenol because of the risk of autism in their children. He also fueled debunked claims that ingredients in vaccines or timing shots close together could contribute to rising rates of autism. Trump’s comments left some pregnant women angry and others with questions.

Dr. R. Todd Ivey, an OB-GYN in Houston, said he’s already heard from a few patients and expects to get a lot more questions in the coming weeks.

“People are concerned,” he said. “But what I’m doing is reassuring patients that there is no causation that has ever been proven.”

Moms have mixed reactions to Trump’s announcement

As a nurse, Ayer knew she didn’t have a lot of options for treating her migraines and a fever she spiked during a bout of COVID-19.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has long considered Tylenol, also known by the generic name acetaminophen, one of the only safe pain relievers during pregnancy. Five years ago, the Food and Drug Administration warned that the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs like aspirin or ibuprofen might cause rare but serious kidney problems in a fetus.

“Weighing benefits and risks, I had no reservations when taking Tylenol,” the 30-year-old Ayer said, especially since she knew that untreated fevers in pregnancy, particularly in the first trimester, increase the risk for miscarriages, preterm birth and other problems.

Despite her medical knowledge, she had a conversation with her doctor about taking Tylenol “and kind of got the all clear on their end, too.”

When she gives birth, she plans to give her baby all the vaccines that medical experts recommend.

But other pregnant women are not so sure about things.

Dr. Stella Dantas, an OB-GYN in Portland, Oregon, said she was starting to get questions through her patient email system.

“I anticipate we’re going to have a lot of anxiety about using acetaminophen, which we counsel them is OK to use if they have a headache, if they have a fever,” she said. “There are a number of reasons patients will need to take it, and patients already feel anxious about taking any medication in pregnancy.”

Doctors reassure patients that Tylenol and vaccines are safe

Dr. Clayton Alfonso, an OB-GYN at Duke University in North Carolina, is drafting up standard responses for the nursing team to give out to Tylenol inquiries.

The main message: Tylenol has been around for decades, is safe, and has not been shown to cause autism.

Acetaminophen use during pregnancy hadn’t increased in recent decades like autism rates have, according to the Coalition of Autism Scientists.

Some studies have raised the possibility that taking acetaminophen in pregnancy might be associated with a risk of autism — but many others haven’t found a connection. One challenge is that it’s hard to disentangle the effects of Tylenol use from the effects of high fevers during pregnancy.

Science has shown autism is mostly rooted in genetics. Experts say different combinations of genes and other factors — such as age of the child’s father and whether the mother had health problems during the pregnancy — can all affect how a fetal brain develops.

Besides letting patients know “there has been no causal link established or proven” between Tylenol use in pregnancy and autism, Dantas said she’s also advising patients against “toughing it out” if they have fever or pain.

“A healthy pregnancy starts with a healthy mom,” Dantas said. “So I would ask patients if they are concerned to consult their physicians. And trust in the medical advice given to them.”

Doctors said much the same about advising patients to get their newborns vaccinated. Ivey said doctors are seeing more people decline vaccinations lately, which “speaks to the distrust for the medical community in general.”

“We know that these vaccines save lives,” and don’t cause autism, he said.

Doctors also said they don’t want women to doubt what they did during pregnancy if their child does develop autism.

“We need to take a deep breath,” Ivey said. “We need to trust the people that are doing the work – the scientists, the physicians, the other health care providers.”

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

“There’s something admirable about trying to restore life in the places that need it most. But without pairing those efforts with real investment in pollution control, especially wastewater infrastructure, we’re asking oysters to succeed in conditions that science says they can’t withstand long-term.”

An evening view of the northern tip of City Island, one of several local waterways where oyster reefs are being used to help filter out pollution. (Adi Talwar)

When I first learned about oyster restoration in New York Harbor, I was amazed. These small, craggy creatures could filter water, support biodiversity, and even help stabilize shorelines. With over 150 million oysters already introduced by initiatives like the Billion Oyster Project, it felt like a rare climate success story.

I volunteered with the organization, helping monitor oyster research stations, collecting data on biodiversity and growth, prepping shell piles on Governors Island, and tying knots for cages. I spent time watching the mud crabs and (perhaps a little too enthusiastically) squeezing sea squirts like glorified ocean stress balls. It was hard not to be inspired. These reefs weren’t just theoretical solutions. They were alive, and they were bringing the harbor back with them. But what I’ve come to realize is that they’re also incredibly vulnerable, and we rarely talk about that. 

New York City’s sewer system is over a century old. In much of the city, stormwater and sewage still flow through the same pipes. When it rains, even just a 10th of an inch in an hour, the system overflows. These combined sewer overflows (CSOs) happen around 90 to 100 days a year, releasing an estimated 27 billion gallons of untreated waste directly into local waterways. That’s the water oysters are expected to filter.

In theory, that’s part of their job. Oysters are filter feeders, capable of processing up to 50 gallons of water per day, removing particulates, bacteria, and excess nutrients. That’s why oyster restoration is framed as a nature-based solution to urban water pollution. But in reality, these systems can be overwhelmed, and increasingly are, as climate change makes heavy rainfall and flooding more frequent.

CSOs flood estuaries like New York Harbor with a slurry of freshwater, debris, heavy metals, bacteria, and nutrients. They lower salinity, increase turbidity, deplete oxygen, and introduce a mix of pathogens and pollutants. For oysters, this isn’t just unpleasant, it’s dangerous. Research shows that exposure to CSO-related stressors can impair oyster shell growth, weaken their immune systems, and disrupt the microbial communities that help them process pollutants. In some cases, they may even stop filtering altogether, temporarily closing their shells in response to poor water quality.

And yet, despite these limitations, oyster restoration is often presented as a silver bullet, “living infrastructure” that will clean our waters and buffer our coasts. It’s a compelling idea and I understand the appeal. But we have to ask: what do we owe to the systems we’re asking to protect us? 

Because the truth is, many restored reefs are being placed into waters that are still fundamentally polluted. High-profile restoration zones like Jamaica Bay, Newtown Creek, and the Gowanus Canal are also among the most heavily affected by CSOs. Newtown Creek alone sees an estimated 1.2 billion gallons of sewage overflow annually. 

There’s something admirable about trying to restore life in the places that need it most. But without pairing those efforts with real investment in pollution control, especially wastewater infrastructure, we’re asking oysters to succeed in conditions that science says they can’t withstand long-term.

That’s not to say the people running these projects don’t understand the risks. They do. Establishing a reef takes years of planning, monitoring, and permitting before a single oyster is deployed. At the City Island Oyster Reef, for example, teams spent years conducting fish surveys, measuring biodiversity, and assessing habitat conditions, and only now are they nearing the point of installing their first actual reef. Even after installation, these reefs require continued maintenance and oversight. They are not self-sustaining, not yet. 

But public narratives often simplify this. Reef openings get press coverage. Infographics tout the filtration power of a single oyster. But what doesn’t always get communicated is that oysters don’t scale overnight. They don’t filter through floods. They don’t fix what we refuse to.

And that’s where the real tension lies. When restoration is presented as a climate solution without the necessary structural reforms, we risk falling into what economists call a moral hazard: the assumption that something (or someone) else will absorb the consequences of inaction. In this case, the oysters become the stand-ins. We ask them to filter the byproducts of climate change, outdated infrastructure, and political delay. Not because it’s the best strategy, but because it’s more visible, more fundable, and more palatable than systemic reform.

This isn’t an argument against oyster restoration. I believe deeply in its value. The ecological and educational returns are real. The harbor is healthier today than it was decades ago, and these reefs are part of that progress. But we need to be honest about what oysters can (and can’t) do. They can’t prevent raw sewage from flooding their beds 100 times a year. They can’t keep filtering through hypoxic dead zones. And they can’t build resilience on their own. 

If we want to treat restored reefs as infrastructure, we have to treat them like infrastructure, not symbols. That means investing in both gray infrastructure (traditional systems like upgraded sewer lines and stormwater tunnels) and green infrastructure (natural solutions like rain gardens and permeable pavement that help reduce runoff at the source). It means ensuring that restoration is not a substitute for reform, but a partner to it.

Why does this matter beyond oysters? Because clean water isn’t just an ecological goal, it’s a public health necessity. Contaminated waterways can harm vulnerable communities, spread disease, and degrade the urban environment for everyone who lives near it. We can’t build climate resilience on symbolism alone.

There’s nothing wrong with celebrating progress. But we can’t mistake visibility for resilience, or inspiration for immunity. Oyster reefs show us what recovery might look like, but only if we stop asking them to filter out everything we haven’t yet faced.

Audrey Li is a Scarsdale High School student who volunteers with oyster restoration projects in New York Harbor and Long Island Sound. 

The post Opinion: When It Comes to NYC’s Waterways, Don’t Let Oysters Do All the Dirty Work appeared first on City Limits.

Dakota County homeowners could see their property taxes increase nearly 10% next year pending a final budget approval in December.

On Tuesday, Dakota County officials adopted a 2026 proposed maximum property tax levy of $184.2 million, up 9.9% from 2025.

“Given anticipated inflationary cost pressures, state and federal cost shifts and funding reductions, a tax levy in this amount is estimated to be needed,” according to county documents.

For a median-value single-family home in Dakota County with a market value of $385,000, the owner would see their taxes go up approximately 9.24%, or $66.11, to total $781.20 in 2026, according to the county.

“One of the things that I have spent my time in leadership focusing on is being able to have our property taxes at a predictable, sustainable level,” said County Commissioner Mary Hamann-Roland, who represents District 7, which includes Apple Valley.

“Our mission is now to create that predictable, sustainable level,” she said, adding that she believes the work is underway.

Last year, the county raised the tax levy 9.9% to $167.7 million. In 2025, that meant homeowners of a median-value single-family home saw their taxes go up roughly $40.

Future projections show the tax levy climbing 11.7% in 2027 for a total of $205.8 million. In 2028, estimates show an increase of 9.6%, totaling $225.5 million, according to the county.

In 2024, Dakota County claimed the lowest levy per capita in the state of Minnesota and the lowest property tax rate among the seven metropolitan counties.

For 2026, however, Dakota County is on the higher end of preliminary levy increases for the metro area at 9.9%. This year, Anoka County is at 9.9%, Ramsey County is at 9.75%, Hennepin County is at 7.79% and Washington County is at 6.95%, according to Dakota County documents.

Additional levies

Although there more than two months until the county’s budget will be finalized, Dakota County residents should prepare as other levies are decided.

The city of Eagan, for example, approved a preliminary 2026 tax levy increase of 8.9% earlier this month. The city’s 2026 General Fund budget of $59.5 million represents an 8% increase or about $4.39 million over 2025, according to city documents.

For owners of an average value home in Eagan of $426,272, they will see their 2026 property taxes increase 9.6%, or $140, to $1,594 compared to $1,454 last year.

Independent School District 196, which includes Rosemount, Apple Valley and Eagan schools, is asking voters to renew and increase its technology capital projects levy. Currently at 3.015%, if the levy is renewed and increased to 5.015%, homeowners of a roughly $400,000 home will see an $85 increase in their property taxes, according to the district.

Related Articles

Looking for a mentor: Liv

Drivers asked to use extra caution for motorcycle Flood Run weekend

Liquid larceny: Used cooking oil thefts bubbling up in the Twin Cities

Second defendant gets 12½-year sentence for role in fatal shooting of South St. Paul father during marijuana robbery

Duluth cannabis dispensary is state’s first licensed seller to open its doors … at 4:20 p.m. no less

Hypothetically, if each levy were to pass and remain unchanged from the time of this reporting, Eagan residents who own a $400,000 home could see a property tax increase of about $291 between county, city, and school district levies.

The county’s Truth in Taxation hearing is scheduled for 6 p.m. on Dec. 2 at the Dakota County Administration Center, located at 1590 Minnesota 55 in Hastings.

The final approval and adoption of the 2026 budget is expected to take place at the Dec. 16 Board of Commissioners meeting.

By LARRY NEUMEISTER

NEW YORK (AP) — Mexican megachurch leader Naasón Joaquín García pleaded not guilty on Tuesday to sex trafficking charges during his first appearance in a New York federal court, where he is charged along with his 79-year-old mother with sexually abusing generations of young followers.

Related Articles

Build-A-Bear continues to rack up market gains, despite tariffs and teetering mall traffic

Bobby Cain, a member of the Clinton 12 who helped integrate Tennessee high schools in 1956, has died

Rafael Nadal alerts about fake videos of him offering financial advice

Maine wardens rescue moose trapped for hours in abandoned well

How a SIM farm like the one found near the UN threatens telecom networks

Two weeks ago, an unsealed indictment in Manhattan accused García, 56, of Los Angeles, of using his position as head of La Luz del Mundo (The Light of the World) church to sexually abuse children and women. The indictment said his father and grandfather, both deceased, did the same before him.

At a hearing before Judge Loretta A. Preska, García listened to a Spanish translator through headphones and sometimes spoke English.

After García pleaded not guilty, Assistant U.S. Attorney Elizabeth Espinosa said there was an enormous amount of electronic evidence in the case, including evidence from a 2019 California state prosecution that led to a prison sentence of more than 16 years, which García is currently serving.

She said over two dozen additional electronic devices were seized two weeks ago during raids on three locations in the Central District of California, which includes Los Angeles.

Prosecutors said photos and videos of child sex abuse have been seized.

The church was used for sex trafficking of women and children in the United States, Mexico, Europe, Asia, Africa, and elsewhere, according to court documents, which said the church claims a presence in over 50 countries and millions of members worldwide, although reliable membership statistics are not available.

In the United States, the church has locations in California, New York, Nevada, Texas, Georgia, Indiana, North Carolina, South Carolina, New Jersey, and Washington D.C., among other places, prosecutors said.

As the leader of the church, García was considered the “Apostle,” and church members were taught that God will punish and eternally damn anyone who doubts the Apostle, fails to follow his teachings or defies the Apostle, prosecutors said in a court document that successfully argued that bail not be granted to García’s mother.

Prosecutors say they have seized hundreds of child pornography images that were created at García’s direction and sent to him via cellphone.

They also said García enriched himself and others by forcing church followers to work in construction or as nannies, aides, accountants, cleaners and other jobs for long hours with no pay.

A lawyer for Garcia did not immediately return a request for comment on Tuesday.

Two weeks ago, attorney Alan Jackson, representing García, called the indictment the result of “a reckless campaign of government overreach.”

He denied the charges, calling them “a rehashing of old, recycled claims that have been made before, scrutinized before, and ultimately debunked and disproven before.”

Nicholas Biase, a spokesperson for prosecutors, said the investigation is continuing and urged anyone victimized in the case to call the prosecutor’s office or email them at USANYS.LLDM@usdoj.gov.”

García’s next hearing was scheduled for Dec. 15.