I'm not claiming the duplication issues aren't issues with his professional conduct. But from a purely scientific point of view, they do not change the results

I'm not claiming the duplication issues aren't issues with his professional conduct. But from a purely scientific point of view, they do not change the results. This article is trying to make the claim that 1)this guy has issues in some of his publications, 2) some of this guy's publications were used for the "Smarter Lunches Program", so 3) the Smarter Lunches Program is flawed. The only attempt they make at connections between these three points is that the same guy is involved. They made no attempt to say the flawed publications were used to design the lunch program, and made no attempt to show the lunch program was flawed as a result.