IMO, it's a critique on the "no study shows it exists, therefore it doesn't exist" attitude. If you manage to do double-blind studies for every single piece of

IMO, it's a critique on the "no study shows it exists, therefore it doesn't exist" attitude. If you manage to do double-blind studies for every single piece of knowledge out there, kudos for you. There's nothing bad in this. Anyway, it's on topic for several sidelines people are raising. But not on topic for the main article.