Yes, but using === would have identify such bugs by causing failure of the test rather than running the code for "is true" and getting odd results. The conditional code simply not running will often make the bug (one of the values not being of the expected type) easier to trace than a calculation resulting in 51 instead of 6 ("5"+1 rather than 5+1) at some point later.

You can fix such a bug in two ways: "manually" coerce the values when used, or make sure they get converted to the right type as early as possible. I find tha ltter, along with using === except where you really must have a more flexible comparison, to be the better approach. And if I mistype and skip a = I end up with == instead of = (which would cause a different class of bug!)