[isityouyesitsme]

Not really. It's the very definition of an ad hominem.

If the study uses non-factual information or does not interpret the data by understanding the nuances that may yield different interpretations, then the author's educational background may offer an explanation. But that isn't the critique here.

It's just reverse ageism with a mix of elitism.

[throwaway4220]

I said to counter the “Harvard researcher” points this article got. If you want to go on merit don’t name drop

[JohnFen]

I think it was the website that name-dropped, not the author of the study. It seems poor form to criticize the study itself based on how it's reported in pop media.

Studies stand or fall on their own merits. The background of the author isn't actually relevant to that. If the study holds, it holds. If it doesn't, it doesn't.

[throwaway4220]

I mean.. I also explained why I thought study was lacking

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00862