And back to the OP, who considers the Lancet a reliable source of information?
It used to be a very reliable source for medical matters. It used to be almost Gold Standard. Then it was sold to Elsevier and promptly fell off the mantelpiece. Then it amalgamated with the EAT Consortium, and has formed a very obvious commercial and agenda bias. As my OP points out, this article has a very definite bias, and is not alone. The whole caboodle is now known as EAT Lancet, and publishes Open Science data, so in other words, science studies no longer require peer review or prior publication in other journals or University annals. Any old graduate or postgrad writings seem to get webspace. It has joined PLOS ONE and Nature in pushing a message for the World. and has financial and political dreams.
