[KennyBlanken]

They're being downvoted likely because one study which missed a factor does not make personal anecdotes more valuable, or say anything about the reliability of the scientific method.

The irony of using one study...yeesh.

Also: science is iterative, people. Nobody in the scientific community looks at one study in a vacuum. Follow-up studies seek to confirm, efine, build off of, or come up with a different theory.

Only internet commenters who pride themselves in being "skeptics" do this - because they think skeptics are the smartest people, failing to understand that uneducated skepticism has little value.

When they hear the study had some flaw, they shout "AHA! RESEARCH IS BUNK!" and assume everything that came out of it was useless. Or, more commonly, they don't see some obvious potential flaw not specifically spelled out as being addressed just like a math paper wouldn't explain basic calculus - and assume they've found some flaw that somehow multiple people who have studied in their field for years - missed.

It's like looking at a bowl of cake batter and crying out "that's soup, you're incompetent!" to a chef who has a Michelin star, because it doesn't look or taste like a cake.

[gxs]

Wow you read way way too much into my comment

Sorry it got you bent out of shape