> Do you still stand by that position?

I stand by that and what I say in my next tweet about why I don't believe those rgs mean what people think they mean, which you apparently did not bother to read while trawling through my tweets.

> But, setting aside that plausible alternative hypotheses are easily found, what I was asking for something less hand-wavy than "probably" to explain away the finding.

There is lots of good evidence for both hygiene and myopia. They do not require dismissing an entire century of research based on a single completely wacky sample which is internally insane and has guaranteed bias due to double self-selection effects. One man's modus ponens... https://www.gwern.net/Modus