That's a separate problem. It's true that the selection bias around a lack of negative results is a problem, all that means is that you cannot interpret a lack

That's a separate problem. It's true that the selection bias around a lack of negative results is a problem, all that means is that you cannot interpret a lack of support in the literature as evidence one way or the other. I can't assume that a drug has no side effects based on a lack of documented research pointing out those effects. Such a study would likely be kept quiet, I know. When a study is actually published though, you can hopefully interpret the study on its own merits. There's still potential for fraud and misconduct, but that's why we'd ideally devote more time to replication studies. That said, I was assuming from the article that there was an actual peer-reviewed study resulting from this research, but the only thing I can find online is an affadavit Hosoi filed on behalf of Fanduel. If there's no published study anywhere, there's nothing to really counteract the suspicion you assume based on funding.