Health
A Swearing Expert Discusses the State of Profanity

Cursing is coursing through society. Words once too blue to publicly utter have become increasingly commonplace. “Language is just part of the whole shift to a more casual lifestyle,” said Timothy Jay, a professor emeritus of psychology at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts in North Adams, Mass.
Dr. Jay has spent a career studying the use of profanity, from what motivates it to the ways in which it satisfies, signals meaning and offends. Although officially retired, he has continued to edit studies on profanity and he recently offered an expert opinion in an ongoing legal dispute in Michigan over whether the phrase “Let’s go Brandon” (a euphemism used to denigrate former President Joseph R. Biden Jr.) should be reasonably interpreted as “profane.” (It should not, Dr. Jay opined.)
Dr. Jay posits that the increasingly casual nature of the spoken word derives in part from the way people communicate on social media. One study, published in 2014 by other researchers in the field, found that curse words on Twitter, now known as X, appeared in 7.7 percent of posts, with profanity representing about 1 in every 10 words on the platform. That compared to a swearing rate of 0.5 to 0.7 percent in spoken language, the study found.
If that data troubles you, Dr. Jay has some thoughts on how to dial back the profanity. F*@%-free February, anyone?
This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity, and scrubbed of some of the vernacular that Dr. Jay conceded he regularly uses on the golf course.
Why does social media contribute to more casual use of language?
People are remote, so they can be aggressive without any physical retaliation. By and large, you’re anonymous, so there’s no personal consequence. It’s also part of a larger shift to a more casual lifestyle. What kids are wearing to school these days would have been disgraceful in my day.
Is that a problem — not the clothes, the swearing?
Our culture is constantly evolving and will continue to evolve. One place it is a problem is the way that women are increasingly attacked online and harassed.
So you don’t really see this development as positive or negative?
Slang is made to confront authority and to create a code that identifies one as an in-group member. Misuse of slang means you are an outsider. Slang must change with time.
The casualness of language coexists with the casualness of clothing styles, workplace behaviors, music lyrics, television content, table manners, et cetera, which have trended in general to a more relaxed state post-World War II, especially notable in the 1960s.
You’re saying that curse words that people once avoided they now say regularly.
For years, I asked people to rank swear words on a scale of one to 10 of which words were the worst. A five would be “damn” or “hell.” That was the middle range. A hundred years ago you couldn’t have used them on the radio; now they’re in the comic strips in the newspaper.
What ranks as a 1?
“Sugar.”
What about other alternatives to longstanding curse words? Can I run a few by you?
Go ahead.
“Fudge” — satisfying?
Not to me.
I hear a lot of people say “flipping” or “freaking.” Which one do you prefer?
I like “frickin’” — I’ve used, “Shut the frickin’ door!”
What do you like about that?
It’s similarity to … [expletive].
So if something is phonetically similar, that makes it satisfying?
It’s how it feels in your entire body — an autonomic nervous-system reaction to hearing someone say [expletive] or saying [expletive] yourself. It raises your pulse, heart rate, breathing rate all above the use of a nonoffensive word such as “calendar.” We recorded skin-conductance tests that demonstrated that taboo words produce a more emotional reaction than nontaboo words. The word arouses us in knowing that we are going to say it and continues to arouse us even after speaking.
Do these words provoke physical aggression?
My research group has recorded over 10,000 people swearing in public. Not once have we seen these usages turn into aggression or violence. Most swearing is casual, conversational and pretty harmless. At the same time, we are more sensitive to language issues surrounding sexual harassment, racial-ethnic-gender discrimination, verbal abuse and threatening language than in the past.
What draws us to a particular word?
It’s personal. One’s psychological history with hearing and saying a word mainly in childhood, and then the consequence of using the word again, brings about the feelings previously associated with the word.
It’s social, meaning the words that are important emotionally not only depend on the speaker’s psychological relationship with the word but also the value and valence of the word within a speaker’s community.
And it’s physical.
Does that suggest that euphemisms may not satisfy, and that therefore we can’t curb our cursing?
The key to breaking a habit is being aware that you do it and then trying to circumvent that.
So you can change the pattern should you wish to?
Yes. If you think about how memory works, what you’ve done is you’ve activated the new word in your brain. And so by activating “freakin’” or “sugar,” you’re making that more salient.
In other words, with practice, you can diminish the potency of the curse word and strengthen the lure of the euphemism.
Yes, but you have to be aware of both pieces and that one of them has natural salience.
Recently, I was watching my grandson, a mogul skier, when he went off course. And I just said, “dang.” He’s 18 years old, and I try not to swear around him. But I have to think about it, especially when I play golf.
From where you sit in retirement, do you feel that swearing research is in good hands?
I gave a keynote speech to a group of international scholars meeting on swearing and cursing in Cologne, Germany, in 2015, two years before I retired. I was 65 years old at the time and most of the speakers were in their 30s and 40s. I realized that there was a new generation continuing to study taboo words in a manner that I pioneered in the 1970s. It was about time to step aside and let them have the glory.

Health
Video: Trump Pushes Unproven Link Between Tylenol and Autism

new video loaded: Trump Pushes Unproven Link Between Tylenol and Autism
By Azeen Ghorayshi, Claire Hogan, Theodore Tae and June Kim•
Top U.S. health officials urged pregnant women not to use acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, claiming it could cause autism, though studies have been inconclusive. Azeen Ghorayshi, a science reporter for The New York Times, explains.
Health
Autism by the numbers: Experts share reasons for the dramatic surge in diagnoses

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Monday’s sweeping autism announcements have sparked deeper conversations about the widespread neurological disorder.
Health officials spoke during a press conference in Washington, D.C., about possible causes, vaccine guidance and the potential for a cancer drug to double as an autism therapy.
Autism diagnoses have been steadily rising in recent decades, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
AUTISM SPECTRUM IN ADULTS HAS COMMONLY OVERLOOKED SYMPTOMS, EXPERTS WARN
“In the 1970s, autism was considered rare, perhaps 1 in 5,000 to 10,000 children,” Steven Quay, M.D., Ph.D., a physician-scientist and founder of Atossa Therapeutics in Seattle, Washington, told Fox News Digital.
In the year 2000, an estimated one in 150 children aged 8 had the disorder. By 2010, that number had risen to one in 68 — and by 2022, one in 31 children were diagnosed.
Autism diagnoses have been steadily rising in recent decades, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (iStock)
“Autism is no longer an uncommon condition tucked away in psychiatric textbooks,” said Quay. “It is part of the daily fabric of schools, clinics and families everywhere.”
Dr. Aggie Papazyan, a Los Angeles-based psychologist specializing in autism spectrum disorder, noted that autism prevalence has also increased globally.
CANCER DRUG COULD DOUBLE AS AUTISM THERAPY, AND IS POISED FOR FDA APPROVAL
“These rates vary by region,” she told Fox News Digital. “In many places, especially in higher-income settings with more robust diagnostic and health resources, prevalence estimates have gone up.”
She added, “However, it’s important to note that how autism is measured makes a big difference.”
Awareness vs. epidemic
The CDC has noted that improved identification of autism could be part of the increase, but that other factors could also come into play.
Decades ago, many autistic people were “missed, misdiagnosed or labeled differently,” said Papazyan.
“There doesn’t seem to be a sudden surge in biological incidence.”
“Over time, as awareness has grown, diagnostic definitions expanded and screening became a bit more routine — so it’s not a surprise to see more autism diagnoses,” she said.
“The biggest misconception is that rising numbers mean autism itself is suddenly becoming more common,” the expert went on. “That’s scary to some people, but there’s no new autism ‘epidemic.’”

Experts say more funding is needed for early intervention programs, such as speech, occupational and behavioral therapies. (iStock)
Most of the increase, according to Papazyan, is due to earlier intervention, broader diagnostic criteria and improved access to services.
“There doesn’t seem to be a sudden surge in biological incidence,” she added. “There may still be a true rise, but it’s not as dramatic as many people want to think.”
Quay said it would be “naïve” to assume that the rise is due only to better detection, and said that environmental change also plays a role.
“Fifty years ago, many individuals on the spectrum were mislabeled — sometimes as intellectually disabled, sometimes as ‘eccentric’ or ‘odd,’ but I do not believe this accounts for the entire increase,” he said.

To counter the rising autism diagnoses, experts call for increasing awareness and acceptance while reducing stigma. (iStock)
“Environmental influences, from prenatal exposures to changes in maternal health to shifts in early childhood experiences, likely play some role.”
‘Urgent need’
To counter the rising autism diagnoses, Papazyan is calling for increasing awareness and acceptance while reducing stigma, as this affects how resources are allocated.
“Beyond that, we need to expand diagnostic and assessment services, especially in underserved communities, so that people are properly diagnosed and given the care they need,” she said.
Papazyan said more funding is also needed for early intervention programs, such as speech, occupational and behavioral therapies.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
The experts also agreed that support is needed for autistic people as they get older, including mental health services, financial assistance and life skills development.
“Interventions are needed that go beyond childhood, because autistic adults will spend most of their lives outside the school system, yet services for them are almost nonexistent,” said Quay.
“Fifty years ago, many individuals on the spectrum were mislabeled.”
Looking ahead, Papazyan predicts that autism prevalence will continue to increase over the next few years before it slows down and eventually hits a plateau.
Quay also expects that prevalence will continue to rise in the near term, largely due to improvements in detection and “societal willingness to diagnose.”
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health
“Whether there is a biological plateau remains to be seen,” he said. “If environmental contributors are identified and mitigated, we could see stabilization.”
Health
Who Makes Vaccine Policy Decisions in RFK Jr.’s Health Department?

For decades, as an activist, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. resisted the scientific consensus that vaccines are safe and necessary to prevent serious disease. Now at the helm of the nation’s health department, he has begun to put his extreme views into practice, ousting veteran scientists and installing allies across the nation’s health agencies to enact major shifts in vaccine policy.
Some of Mr. Kennedy’s hires are activists who have worked for years alongside him. Others are scientists who say they broadly support vaccines but publicly criticized Covid shots or mandates during the pandemic. Many of these scientists have begun to question the safety or value of other shots, reflecting the views of Mr. Kennedy. The following account is based on previous statements made by these officials and on interviews with current and former health agency leaders.
F.D.A. chief medical and scientific officer
Critical of Covid boosters and shots for healthy kids
F.D.A. commissioner
Skeptical of certain vaccines
Dr. Vinay Prasad
Dr. Marty Makary
The agency’s new vaccine lead and chief medical officer, Dr. Vinay Prasad, has called himself an “extreme pro-vaccine person,” and Dr. Marty Makary, the agency’s commissioner, said last week that “we believe in vaccines.”
But the two officials, who sharply criticized vaccine mandates as academic researchers during the pandemic, have expressed doubts about the safety and necessity of Covid boosters for healthy children and adults. This summer, Dr. Prasad overrode some agency scientists who favored widespread access to Covid shots, narrowing the vaccine’s eligibility to those 65 and older and to younger people with underlying medical conditions.
Last week, Dr. Makary echoed the views of Mr. Kennedy when he publicly questioned the longstanding recommendation to give the hepatitis B vaccine at birth. That shot is credited with nearly eliminating the transmission of the disease from mother to infant.
Dr. Prasad replaced a veteran at the agency, Dr. Peter Marks, who resigned in March and said that Mr. Kennedy’s aggressive stance on vaccines posed a danger to the public.
In June, Mr. Kennedy fired all 17 members of a powerful C.D.C. expert panel, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Insurance companies and government programs like Medicaid are required to cover the vaccinations that the panel recommends.
Mr. Kennedy handpicked eight new members that month, half of whom had expressed skepticism of vaccines at some point. (One has since stepped down.) Others have little expertise in immunology or vaccines.
On Monday, Mr. Kennedy appointed five more members, just days before the group meets to review recommendations for multiple vaccines. Some of the newly selected members have been critical of Covid vaccines or vaccine mandates.
Dr. Robert Malone is a controversial figure. He performed early experiments using mRNA in the 1980s but gained notoriety during the pandemic for claiming that Covid vaccines were unsafe, contradicting volumes of studies.
Martin Kulldorff, a biostatistician, has been generally supportive of vaccines but opposed Covid vaccination for children and vaccine mandates. Vicky Pebsworth, a nurse with a doctorate in public health, serves on the board of the National Vaccine Information Center, a nonprofit that disseminates misinformation about the risks of vaccination.
Dr. Malone and Dr. Kulldorff have served as paid expert witnesses in legal cases against vaccine makers. Dr. Pebsworth claimed in a lawsuit that a survey of families of unvaccinated children supported a hypothesis that a rise in the number of recommended childhood vaccines explained an epidemic of chronic disease.
Another panel member, Retsef Levi, is a management and health analytics expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He has been critical of a variety of vaccines and has called for Covid vaccines to be pulled from the market.
Dr. Evelyn Griffin, an obstetrician and gynecologist, questioned the safety and effectiveness of Covid vaccines in a hearing in the Louisiana House of Representatives in 2021. Dr. Kirk Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist, questioned the safety and effectiveness of Covid vaccines at a 2024 event led by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia. Catherine M. Stein is an epidemiology professor who in 2022 called for an end to Covid vaccine mandates at universities.
Dr. Cody Meissner is a professor of pediatrics who opposed vaccine mandates and has questioned the ongoing need for Covid vaccines for children and pregnant women. He previously served on the advisory committee and is widely considered to be the most qualified member.
The others are not known to have spoken out against vaccines. They are Dr. Joseph R. Hibbeln, a nutritional neuroscientist; Dr. James Pagano, an emergency medicine physician; Hillary Blackburn, a pharmacist; and Dr. Raymond Pollak, a surgeon and transplant specialist.
The C.D.C. director has the power to accept or reject the immunization committee’s recommendations. The current acting director is Mr. Kennedy’s deputy at the Department of Health and Human Services, Jim O’Neill, a former biotechnology executive. The previous director, Susan Monarez, said she was forced out because she would not agree to accept the newly re-formed committee’s recommendations.
A special adviser to the C.D.C. director, Stuart Burns, is a critical player driving the health secretary’s agenda at the agency. Mr. Burns has been quietly working to remake the immunization committee and its agenda.
Mr. Burns is not a scientist but he worked for decades as a staff member for Republican congressmen known for their vaccine skepticism. One is Dr. Dave Weldon, a former representative from Florida who was also Mr. Kennedy’s original choice for C.D.C. director. The White House withdrew Dr. Weldon’s nomination just hours before his confirmation hearing because some Senate Republicans were concerned about his stance on vaccines.
Mr. Burns works closely with three other Kennedy hires who serve H.H.S. but also work closely with the C.D.C. Dr. Reyn Archer is a former Texas health commissioner who has questioned the safety and value of the Covid vaccine on social media. He serves as a liaison between the health secretary’s office and the C.D.C., and has been helping Mr. Burns to develop and guide the immunization committee.
David Geier is a steadfast figure in the anti-vaccine movement who has spent more than 20 years trying to establish a link between vaccines and autism, despite scientific consensus that there is none. Mr. Geier, who is listed as a senior data analyst in the H.H.S. directory, was given access to federal data on post-vaccination side effects and is using it to continue his studies on autism.
Lyn Redwood is a nurse practitioner and the former head of Children’s Health Defense, the anti-vaccine group founded by Mr. Kennedy. Since the early 2000s, Ms. Redwood has criticized the use of mercury as a preservative in vaccines. She has said she believes the ingredient is linked to her son’s autism.
Now listed as an expert at H.H.S., Ms. Redwood gave a presentation in June to the immunization committee, a role usually reserved for C.D.C. scientists. She said that the mercury preservative in vaccines, known as thimerosal, was toxic to children, even though dozens of studies have shown it is harmless in this form. The panel later voted to stop recommending the already limited number of flu vaccines that contained the preservative.
Principal deputy director of the N.I.H.
Skeptical of certain vaccines
N.I.H. director
Critical of Covid vaccine mandates
Dr. Matthew Memoli
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya
Dr. Matthew Memoli is a veteran infectious disease scientist at the National Institutes of Health who now serves as its principal deputy director. As a senior researcher under Dr. Anthony Fauci during the pandemic, Dr. Memoli opposed Covid vaccine mandates and declined to get a shot himself.
Since becoming a leader of the research agency, Dr. Memoli has downplayed the value of vaccines for certain respiratory diseases, according to the whistle-blower complaints of two prominent scientists.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the N.I.H director, sharply criticized vaccine mandates as an academic researcher during the pandemic. He co-wrote an anti-lockdown treatise in 2020 with Dr. Kulldorff, one of Mr. Kennedy’s selections for the C.D.C. immunization committee.
During his confirmation hearing in March, Dr. Bhattacharya reiterated his support for childhood vaccinations for diseases like measles. He also said he was “convinced” vaccines did not cause autism, even as he urged more research on the question, which scientists say has long been settled.
-
Finance1 week ago
Reimagining Finance: Derek Kudsee on Coda’s AI-Powered Future
-
World1 week ago
Syria’s new president takes center stage at UNGA as concerns linger over terrorist past
-
Technology1 week ago
These earbuds include a tiny wired microphone you can hold
-
North Dakota1 week ago
Board approves Brent Sanford as new ‘commissioner’ of North Dakota University System
-
Culture1 week ago
Test Your Memory of These Classic Books for Young Readers
-
Crypto1 week ago
Texas brothers charged in cryptocurrency kidnapping, robbery in MN
-
Crypto1 week ago
EU Enforcers Arrest 5 Over €100M Cryptocurrency Scam – Law360
-
Rhode Island1 week ago
The Ocean State’s Bond With Robert Redford