I disagree. The article articulates a political problem, not an error in reasoning. These few scientists did not just choose a stable approach that later turne

I disagree. The article articulates a political problem, not an error in reasoning. These few scientists did not just choose a stable approach that later turned out to be wrong: they doubled-down, tripled-down on a shakey guess for decades and suppressed voices to the contrary. The seemingly credentialed, respected, and authoritative experts of Alzheimer's sabotaged the science around a hot-button problem for their own personal gain, while society suffered the consequences. This antipattern can be seen as a kind of "academic rent-seeking" or "false-expertise". It can also be called "collusion" given that an organized group of people semi-intentionally marginalized their opposition at the outset, and at great cost to the broader public.