Only a minority of medical articles hold up over time. John Ioannidis, a professor at Stanford, analyzes flaws in medical data. He notes the following:

Ioannidis recommends asking the following questions: is this something that has been seen just once, or in multiple studies? Is it a small or a large study? Is this a randomized experiment? Who funded it? Are the researchers transparent?

https://phys.org/news/2018-07-beware-scientific-studiesmost-wrong.html

Ioannidis notes the influence of industry support on findings in studies. One of the most glaring was a device that received FDA approval after authors of articles in medical journals received significant amounts of money. The device was in use for ten years before questions arose.

https://stanfordmag.org/contents/something-doesn-t-add-up

Ioannidis himself came under fire when he questioned mortality rates reported in the early days of the COVID epidemic. He was merely saying that we had to wait for more numbers from larger groups of patients.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-ioannidis-affair-a-tale-of-major-scientific-overreaction/

Questioning single studies or groups of studies with low numbers of patients is a rational thing to do.

You guys at Dagblog have grown A LOT over the years. Just had to put that out there. You are posting some really excellent material, artappraiser.