[traverseda]

I think we've provided some evidence that suggests there at least might be a problem.

Publishing a rigorous scientific paper saying "well look, here's the problem" is going to be difficult, given the issues such a paper would address. It could be career suicide if handled indelicately.

Given that we have weak evidence that there is a problem, the burden of proof is now on you to provide stronger evidence that there isn't a problem, unless we have a strong prior for there not being a problem or something.

Applying higher standards to things you disagree with is a great way to end up biased. If you require a well reviewed research paper showing that there is a problem, you should also require a similar paper showing you there isn't a problem.

At the very least trying to provide a counter viewpoint to the evidence you've already being presented with would be polite.