> While the article was not meant to be controversial, it generated a sizable negative response, particularly on social media. This was closely followed by an o

> While the article was not meant to be controversial, it generated a sizable negative response, particularly on social media. This was closely followed by an open letter signed by over five hundred academics to the journal's editors alleging (falsely) many ethical lapses and harms– this resulted in the article being retracted (an unprecedented move). This isn't a social media mob. This is professional review and response by academic peers. Retractions are part of the process, and are issued when bad research happens. The fact that so many peers called her out for doing bad research is basically indicative of the general consensus about her being wrong and publishing wrong ideas.