[falldmg]

No, I disagree. Your critique is shallow even for it's relative prominence. The article literally opens with a counterpoint that you shouldn't generally use this as an excuse. What you said in your comment acts almost as perfect critique for itself: it sounds right, but it has zero substance. Why should anyone value a critique that says almost zero actual things about the article and instead draws a general conclusion that sounds like it came from purely reading the headline?

[slingnow]

Having the article state that you "shouldn't use it as an excuse" is probably about as effective as the surgeon generals warning on the side of a pack of cigarettes.

What makes you believe that quick disclaimer would discredit the claim the OP is making?

[falldmg]

This is an invalid critique of the article. It is critiquing it for something it doesn't do, now justified by the idea that people might ignore what it actually says.