Cool, when the journal does not deny something being being disproved by more studies, and retracts the paper, aye? I wish we all could be so science-, not ideology-based.

Also, that's why I trust meta-analyses more than single studies.

If you want to hear sources with no history of fraud, I can send them. Personally though, I don't think that one shitty point 26 years ago proves something to be not trustworthy forever-from-now-on — Signal was hacked once, but we don't think it's now always vulnerable, or furthermore sponsored by CIA. Tor was traced once, same shit, etc etc.