It’s not just a problem with journalism but with humans in general. People are more imprecise with their comprehension of things than they are willing to admit.

How many synonyms did you try before you landed on “imprecise”?

It’s a very diplomatic choice. Moreso than I’d have gone with. I admire your restraint!

Thank you. Even here on HN, plenty of folks will comment on all kinds of research they know little about.

> Even here on HN, plenty of folks will comment on all kinds of research they know little about.

I don't see anything wrong with that, because all opinions are not equal.

I think there is some level of pressure to get one's word in quickly, otherwise the nebulous cloud of commenters moves on to the next story, and your well-thought-out comment that took hours to write is seen by no-one. If you're responding to someone hoping to get into a nice conversation, you're out of luck since they have no idea you just responded to them.

Any thread about nutrition is so painful here.

Anything related to medicine/biochemistry can get cringe-y pretty quickly here. I think the problem is that the crowd here is generally pretty intelligent, but they know it and it's a coefficient > 1 on the Dunning-Kruger effect

Welcome to advertising driven journalism.