I wouldn't discount it. But the more a published scientific finding spins a narrative that would confirm people's existing sensitivities, the more evidence it

I wouldn't discount it. But the more a published scientific finding spins a narrative that would confirm people's existing sensitivities, the more evidence it takes for me to be convinced it is true. Because of all false scientific findings (which most are: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/), the ones that are most likely to virally propagate despite being false are the ones that people want to be true. So the more I can imagine someone nodding their head and saying "yeah, that totally makes sense," the more I am skeptical of the study until I see some pretty solid evidence. (I haven't looked at the evidence for this at all, so have no opinion on it).