You continue falling to the straw man fallacy by bringing over and over the correlation is causation criticism, but the study doesn't make causal claims... I u

You continue falling to the straw man fallacy by bringing over and over the correlation is causation criticism, but the study doesn't make causal claims... I understand that an analysis like that is not conducive to thoughtful and insightful debate for closed-minded people who do not care, or even oppose, to learn things that don't align with their interests. You continue to ignore my responses to your points, e.g., about the fact that the study takes care of external events by applying difference-in-differences methodology, and continue writing accusations without being specific. If anything, disinformation and censorship of research are worthless, flawed, unethical, and cowardly.