Given that in most fields publication bias and p-hacking is standard and basically written into the way science is published (i.e. you only publish your results after you've done your study, so noone knows what you intended to study when you started) it's normal to assume that most things published are simply wrong.
There's pretty good evidence that a mixture of publication bias and p-hacking very likely leads to the majority of studies being false: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...
Given that in most fields publication bias and p-hacking is standard and basically written into the way science is published (i.e. you only publish your results after you've done your study, so noone knows what you intended to study when you started) it's normal to assume that most things published are simply wrong.