Comment
Comment by award_
If this was a legit study I'd expect an arXiv link or similar instead. Looking at their methodology, it's vague enough to be interpreted as 'ok' but really I'd expect ALOT more information on their sample distributions, weighting done to that sample for comparison, etc. It skimps on all the actual details. Seems like clickbaity junk to me, but I'm open to the idea that there is meaningful studies to be had here on this subject, or that this was done in a proper way but was communicated poorly.