> Views still need to be backed by solid data and in this case, the Stanford study the article is highlight has a number of issues with its data. That articles

> Views still need to be backed by solid data and in this case, the Stanford study the article is highlight has a number of issues with its data. That articles backed by solid data is certainly the desired state, but it is very far from the current state of affairs on COVID. There are many articles that tout opposing views that are pretty liberal with data. Requesting an official apology (which, in science is almost unheard of) is simply an attempt at harassment. Mistakes happen, you refute errors and move on. Scientists must be allowed to explore and advocate non-traditional views. Otherwise (and very quickly if you let hecklers in) you create static beliefs that live on for a long time, whether true or not, because the bar for challenge is very high and an error ruins a career.