By no means does this little nit invalidate the entire article. But since this article is a grab-bag of separate points, we can only critique point by point. I

By no means does this little nit invalidate the entire article. But since this article is a grab-bag of separate points, we can only critique point by point. I do think the bad cite weakens this one point—if there were better studies in support of this point, why didn’t the author cite them instead? And since there’s no reliable evidentiary backing for this point, you have to go by whether it feels right to you. Which is fine! That’s how most advice works. But we shouldn’t delude ourselves into thinking that “studies say” this point is right without further evidence.