She's not entirely wrong, Dewayne. Fact is, especially in sociological and psychological studies, many are shockingly rife with design flaws. The stats are often biased. They don't account for exclusionary factors. Sociological studies are notoriously designed and interpreted around already existing biases based on the myths we tell ourselves. I could go on.

Then you have science writers who don't actually understand the science and can't even read graphs properly writing public pieces on these studies conflating the findings and getting the science illiterate masses worked up into a frenzy.

Even for studies which were done well...sciemce is a process. Studies have to be replicable and there has to be more than one.

So, she's not wrong to be skeptical.

It's just in this instance, the study I referenced did happen to be a good one and her particular criticism de facto applies to her as well, the way she worsed it. That particular criticism was not the best argument that could have been made, in other words.