I am skeptical that researchers and reviewers of Science wouldn't have accounted for that. I made some research about rebuttal to this study, so far the only ones I have found are from farmer related or anti-vegan communities, which are likely more biased than a scientific journal. I will need at least a contradictory peer reviewed article to convince me this meta analysis is incorrect.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

if the source material can't convince you, then live in ignorance

[–] oce@jlai.lu 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

When you are not an expert of the domain, it is easy to get mislead by arguments such as the one you gave, maybe you're correct, maybe you're misleading, I don't have the knowledge to verify by myself. That's why I need to rely on reputable source, and it's hard to do more reputable than a meta-analysis in Science. If you are correct, the rebuttal will eventually be published in a peer reviewed journal, I'll will be happy to read the conclusions then.

[–] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

it's stated explicitly in the papers cited by poore-nemecek. all you need to do is read