In this case the messenger is being dishonest ... so, yeah, I'll attack him.
The fact is that APA has made fools of themselves, again, by referencing unproven, unrepeated, shoddy studies to promote an agenda (and vaguely without specific reference at that). They now have to back off what they did with another vague statement filled with generalities and undocumented “consensus” type verbiage.
As my mom used to say, "two wrongs don't make a right." Messrs. Unruh and Byrd are making similarly shoddy assertions.
If the APA was wrong, that doesn't make these two guys right. They can be dishonest as well -- and I believe that's exactly what they are.
I don’t think so. To me you seem to be vested on one side of this. You are attacking someone over an overstatement, I don’t see dishonesty but whatever.
It has yet to be determined if you are being as dishonest as you claim them to be. We shall see.