Again, you have missed the point of my post, you seem to want to trash a website that you have a negative opinion of, while that is your right, I don't intend to get into a debate about whether you like a website or not, or whether or not they are brash with people posting on that website.
The study, in the OP of this thread, is misrepresented, by the title, which apparently was the title used by NN , and cut and pasted by the poster, tried to draw a conclusion for a study that did not contain any conclusion. The conflict of interest of the authors of the study were not presented, nor their backgrounds or qualifications, (this was presented in the SBM article), which also IMO took away any credibility this study may have had.
To me, this level of deceit shown by NN, indicates that this website and its authors are not honest, and are unethical. It also indicates a lack of actual evidence, and therefore the need to manufacture evidence to try and push a point.