From the article: > Unfortunately, it is not clear what else the journalists could be expected to do in this case. After all, they just quoted directly from som

From the article: > Unfortunately, it is not clear what else the journalists could be expected to do in this case. After all, they just quoted directly from some values in a published, peer reviewed study. I feel this is a bit naive or condescending to journalists. In many professions you are required to take statistics courses. After all, they are essential to reading studies. And reading studies is something professionals should do. I have only a cursory knowledge of statistics, but enough that if I read the paper I can pretty easily spot the issues mentioned in the article. If a news article mentions a study in passing without depth, it could be forgiven. But writing a whole article on a study based solely on the summary of the researcher is lazy. I think the author of the article might be acting naive with the lack of reporting standards shown by news organizations on this type of articles. The reality is the study came to an unpopular conclusion. News organizations, like politicians, won't touch that stuff.