I picked it because it is someone who wasn't taught this sort of thinking, and who took a job where they didn't until recently do this sort of thinking on the m

I picked it because it is someone who wasn't taught this sort of thinking, and who took a job where they didn't until recently do this sort of thinking on the main. Yes, the paper itself isn't a turning point, but the claims of the paper, if one chooses to accept them, are damning. A science should never confuse theoretical prediction and empiric evidence. Indeed, other agencies like the FDA make the opposite mistake e.g. insisting on endless RCTs for e.g. JJ + mRNA booster vaccine when the theory-based extrapolation from other evidence is simple, and the opportunity cost of waiting non-negligible. It is bad and quite odd given the overall trend of science towards "mindless empiricism" that Econ has the opposite problem!