I mean, I was explicitly lazy, so please don't fault yourself.
To be frank, I'm somewhat miffed by the epistemics of many fedi posts (or maybe by combination of epistemics and presentation). I often see posts that provide some terrible evidence for a claim (e.g. that has a very obvious unaccounted-for confounder, or that fails to find an effect, but lack of effect is the conclusion taken from it, etc.) but are worded as if that is nearly incontrovertible evidence. Their prevalence makes fedi a non-time-effective way to try to figure out anything about the topic, and their presentation makes it uncomfortable for me to try talking with the author about them.
All that said, I feel like complaining about that is tantamount to trying to impose rules of discourse on others that are (a) not standard (b) probably not upheld well by myself quite sometimes. So, I'm completely unsure what would be a generally useful course of action other than trying to do better myself. Alas, I'm not very good at that in particular on some topics.
