The AI verdict is too quick to dismiss the biological plausibility of the mechanism. Even if the study is flawed, the hyperoxic-hypoxic paradox isn’t just a fringe theory—it’s rooted in real cellular responses to oxygen fluctuations. That alone means the claim isn’t entirely without merit. The problem isn’t the science, it’s the overreach in interpretation. The verdict should’ve acknowledged that the mechanism is valid, even if the conclusion isn’t fully supported.