That's incredibly unnecessary. My understanding of statistics is not derived from comics (and the first time I heard that example was in a statistics course), and the link you post doesn't actually address what I stated. It addresses an actual mistake in the comic, which is a mistake that I didn't make.

Here's Andrew, the author of that blog post:

> Yes, I think it makes a lot of sense to criticize particular frequentist or Bayesian methods rather than to criticize freq or Bayes statisticians.

Which is exactly what I did. There are times when frequentist methods are effective. I just wouldn't use them to tell me that I have a disease.