Very true, especially on side topics science is extremely vulnerable. You have no counter study and peer review is a lot of work, so some works might just stay uncontested for a very long time.

Meanwhile, a lot of proved studies are dismissed for political reasons. Sometimes that is good, sometimes not. But it is safe to say that it would indeed not be prudent to derive policy impetus from a lot of sciences without a public debate.

And I mean public, not just academic circles.