I have a general rule to ignore any statistical interpretation in articles like these. Data interpretation is hard. There are a lot of variables that need to be

I have a general rule to ignore any statistical interpretation in articles like these. Data interpretation is hard. There are a lot of variables that need to be accounted for, and under the best circumstances of academic peer review, we still get it wrong. This article also feels like it has an agenda. Maybe I'm not familiar with MotherJones, but the tone of the article strikes me as unprofessional. And the headline, that's obviously correct and means nothing. It's like saying, "Why You Shouldn't Trust Every Stranger You Meet".