This article mentions that there was tobacco money and then does a lot of hand waving insinuation that Selye was wrong. I don't think that's the case. As far as

This article mentions that there was tobacco money and then does a lot of hand waving insinuation that Selye was wrong. I don't think that's the case. As far as I understand it he remains a giant in the field and his work continues to be built on. Selye was willing to say some people were overstating the role of tobacco in isolation as a cause of disease. So? I happen to think he was right. I read Sapolsky's "Why Don't Zebras Get Ulcers?" it confirmed Selye's major ideas. It was extensively end-noted with modern research.