[cwyers]

The Guardian article linked actually doesn't present the statistics of the study, which hasn't been published yet. Absent further information, critiquing the sample size sounds pretty reasonable to me.

[nerfhammer]

You can't criticize the sample size without knowing the effect size

[cwyers]

Withholding evidence isn't a defense against criticism. If you won't TELL ME your effect size, but you do tell me the sample size, I can certainly say, "I am skeptical of your conclusion, because of your sample size."

[voronoff]

Criticizing the stats of an article that hasn't been published b/c of science news reporting on it is an exercise in madness.

Criticize the science news instead.

[nerfhammer]

You should instead say "I am skeptical of your conclusion, because I don't know your effect size."