[Blackpill] (ThugPill) Being Nice is Detrimental to Life Quality of Men (including sex life)

G

gstvtrp

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Posts
2,312
Online
0
Not really news, but nice to see there is scientific evidence to back it up.
Everyone knew the whole "nice guys are actually manipulative assholes meme" was bullshit made up by women to justify their lack of attraction to nice men. Now there is actual proof of it.
High IQ but dumbasses are still falling for that meme.
 
manlet cUnt

manlet cUnt

will he get perma banned next week? who knows
-
Joined
May 12, 2018
Posts
2,278
Online
0
they want to cry misogyny but secretly it makes their pussy wet? you literally cant fucking win in this world so i might as well treat them like filth
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
they want to cry misogyny but secretly it makes their pussy wet? you literally cant fucking win in this world so i might as well treat them like filth
They want the unattractive men to "know their place." Their biological urges and psychological needs are inconvenient to women so they are shaming those low value men to submission so they finally stop acting like they should be treated as fellow humans.
Only Chads and truly alpha men are allowed to act like this, to act like a real, primitive man.
A shame I can’t use this knowledge to my advantage, or else I would end up looking like a try hard beta manlet. At least I’m black pilled enough to know to stay in my place, rather than making a fool of myself.
Spot on. This thread implicitly explained WHY women like tall and "confident" men. Its because their subconscious mind see's them as this dangerous mad man. Acting like a "dangerous madman" when you look like a little boy playing and your NT/inhibition is at dork levels then you will be a total laughing stock.
 
Last edited:
SSpaghetti

SSpaghetti

Recruit
Joined
Jun 2, 2018
Posts
97
Online
0
TL:DR

Give it too me in lerymans terms
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
TL:DR

Give it too me in lerymans terms
Girls don't like nice guys, they like bad boys. Also girls only like confident guys because in the back of their mind they see those types of guys as thugs.
Cucktears need this explained that simple to understand.
 
FrailPaleStaleMale

FrailPaleStaleMale

Hopeless addict druggicel
★★★★★
Joined
May 7, 2018
Posts
6,504
Online
90d 12h 0m
Huge blackpill this is. Truth af
 
Spidey

Spidey

Peter Parker
-
Joined
Feb 19, 2018
Posts
987
Online
0
not gonna say details but from my own experience, this is facts.

what's sad is that as a nice person, you get treated worse than an asshole.
 
yung incel

yung incel

Banned
-
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Posts
190
Online
0
Fucking kms. What a world we live in when assholes get treated better/the same as nice people.
 
Itsoverboyos

Itsoverboyos

Mixed-Race Goblin
★★
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Posts
1,192
Online
10h 13m
I'd say it's more of a humanity issue than anything, all people are scum.
Stop the cope junecel
Humanity = men + women
Pretty much nearly everything men do is to get women, at least subconsciously. If being a violent asshole wasn't a great reproductive strategy, it would have died out long ago.
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
If being a violent asshole wasn't a great reproductive strategy, it would have died out long ago.
Hating the black, whites, jews, or women separately is all cope. Nature caused all this evil, not humans or any animal. Women wouldn't be the way they are if nature didn't call for them to be this way. Everyone is guilty. Just look at my signature for proof of the natural evil that runs through us all.
 
microDongCityUSA

microDongCityUSA

Major
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
2,437
Online
4d 9h 45m
they want to cry misogyny but secretly it makes their pussy wet? you literally cant fucking win in this world so i might as well treat them like filth
Theory - womens vaginas gets wet from fear/possibility of rape violence to lessen the pain of the penis entering, probably some cave man biologically trait to protect womans vaginas
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
Theory - womens vaginas gets wet from fear/possibility of rape violence to lessen the pain of the penis entering, probably some cave man biologically trait to protect womans vaginas
It is because mating with the alpha cave man will make her safer. The violent kind, ironic enough. Gotta protect from other men and animals.
 
microDongCityUSA

microDongCityUSA

Major
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
2,437
Online
4d 9h 45m
It is because mating with the alpha cave man will make her safer. The violent kind, ironic enough. Gotta protect from other men and animals.
True

Also check out this ancient Buddhist story from Canonical text Dhammpada about a femoid helping bad boy Chad Gang member who she just met to kill her husband

http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=349
The Buddha called the young bhikkhu to his presence and said to him,"My son, listen to me. This young woman will be your undoing just as she had been to you in a previous existence. In one of your previous existences you were a very skilful archer and she was your wife. On one occasion, while the two of you were travelling, you came upon a gang of highwaymen. She fell in love with the gang leader. So, while you and the gang leader were engaged in fighting and you called out to her to give you the sword, she gave the sword to the robber who promptly killed you. Thus, she was the cause of your death. Now, too, she will be the cause of your ruin if you go after her and leave my Order for her sake."
Bonus

 
Last edited:
allbluee

allbluee

Slowly fading away
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
839
Online
4d 23h 59m
Thats some high quality Post made! Gj OP
 
Zyros

Zyros

Banned
-
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Posts
3,389
Online
0
More like being ugly. Nice guy Chad with altruistic persobality is seen as a Saint.
 
L

LowBorn

Recruit
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Posts
20
Online
0
I find it odd, this bad boy attraction. Seems to me that they would be better protected by a "doormat" than a thug. Ted Bundy would be a hopeless family defender. He would just lope off when danger appeared, while a "doormat" would defend what he sees as his all, no? THe beta in this case knows that what he has is the best he will get but the alpha can always get more and so will not risk his "life" in defense of a woman or family if a "sabertooth" shows up.
In any case, real good OP!
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
More like being ugly. Nice guy Chad with altruistic persobality is seen as a Saint.
LMS boyo. Bad boys increase status, thus increase your smv. That doesn't mean nice chad automatically can't get girls. But mean one is still higher. This is like saying manlet chad gets more action tham tall incel. Smv is the total amount of value when adding face, height, nt, inhibition,etc.
 
microDongCityUSA

microDongCityUSA

Major
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
2,437
Online
4d 9h 45m
All my asian uncles who have wives behave aggressive, controlling, loud/talkative in groups - one uncle who I'd consider nicer and less aggressive than others had his asian wife cheat on him about a decade ago which my family doesn't bring up. She's still around and she did date white men beforehand
 
microDongCityUSA

microDongCityUSA

Major
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
2,437
Online
4d 9h 45m
13k on suicide watch.
She was getting older and she started attending church. Even people who are atheists should realize organized religion can be good for keeping females in check to some degree.
 
B

Berlincel

Recruit
Joined
Jun 10, 2018
Posts
13
Online
0
Heinous murderers get tons of marriage proposals from dipshit femoids.

Scott Peterson, the man who was convicted of murdering his wife and unborn child, had been on Death Row barely an hour when the first proposal arrived from a woman who wants to be the new Mrs. Scott Peterson.
Three dozen phone calls came in to the warden's office on Peterson's first day at his new home in San Quentin State Prison -- women were pleading for his mailing address, and one smitten 18-year-old said she wanted to marry him.
Richard Allen Davis, the man who kidnapped 12-year-old Polly Klaas from her Petaluma home in 1993 and killed her, "probably gets more mail than most," Messick said. Richard Ramirez, the "Night Stalker" who killed 13 people and has more than a passing interest in Satanism, has women virtually throwing themselves at him despite the fact he is already married.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/No-shortage-of-women-who-dream-of-snaring-a-2689657.php
 
donuthate1

donuthate1

Recruit
Joined
Jun 5, 2018
Posts
2
Online
0
Where I live, you just have to listen to local rap music, smoke weed, get into fights over stupid shit and not blackout from alcohol and you can get trashy although hot women. Im just too much of a pussy to do anything.
 
M

metal

Banned
-
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Posts
1,971
Online
8h 45m
women like strong men, not good boys
 
Robtical

Robtical

Incel but not cuck
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 6, 2018
Posts
26,219
Online
209d 50m
I said, slap your 50 year old fat mother!

Unless you're too much of an autist to do that, lol
My mom isn't a feminist, your mom is so it would be better if I fucked and slapped her.
 
mentalcel

mentalcel

Incels with hate
★★★★
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Posts
1,337
Online
4d 8h 32m
Being nice and them being nice to you in return is the ideal but it doesn't just work that way in real life
Have you ever been bullied but you didn't do anything wrong except by being nice to them?
Every bullied incel including I should know this obvious brutal blackpill
Being nice does nothing but attracts bullies or people would think taking advantage of you.
 
BasedGod

BasedGod

Enter the void
★★★★
Joined
Mar 15, 2018
Posts
813
Online
8h 58m
And the research to back it up. Cucktears will deny this jfl
 
Barry

Barry

Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2018
Posts
1,082
Online
5d 2h 15m
someone needs to write a guide to thug game.

like how are us normal folks going to give image of being a thug when we sit on computer all day?

I mean you can get tattoos and get contacts instead of big eugene glasses. and you can get a fucking pitbull.

but you're still going to be a loser.

and let's face it if we try and be actual thugs we're gonna get fucked up by some 15 year old wigger and then he'll piss on us and put it on worldstar and we're back to square minus one.

so what do we do guys
 
microDongCityUSA

microDongCityUSA

Major
★★★★★
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Posts
2,437
Online
4d 9h 45m
made this infographic
Really well done man, summed up nice

i fall into that category of being paid less, when i attended counciling sessions a year or so ago i was told told by my stacey counselor i'm altruistic..... its a turn off to femoids tho

I believe thats why /r/niceguys was made on reddit, females genuinely hate men who put others before themselves.

Even late comedian Patrice Oneal said you can't put a woman in the relationship ahead of yourself, she needs to be #3 maximum, put your mother ahead of her, your mother father, you of course need to put yourself ahead of her....they lose respect for you if you pedestal them. I've grown up seeing female family friends staying with abusive Men and heard the excuse its manipulation on mans part, no, women like guys who treat them lower, it gives the perception to the femoid of he's a protector and better than you.

This is probably why older cultures knew women had to be controlled whereas today its SJW's and Numales following females who will continue society down a darker greedy, kill the weak while virtue signalling you care for them path.
 
Last edited:
Inbuddhist

Inbuddhist

Major
Joined
Feb 26, 2018
Posts
2,078
Online
22m
Why live after reading this ?
 
psilocybincel

psilocybincel

God's flesh
★★★
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Posts
264
Online
0
I don't know if I can trust this source anymore, seeing as they labeled Charles Manson as a serial killer. He wasn't even a regular killer; he didn't kill anyone. He was more like a cult leader who convinced other people to kill for him.
 
ColdLightOfDay

ColdLightOfDay

Serge’s alt.
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
5,851
Online
25d 14h 37m
I don't know if I can trust this source anymore, seeing as they labeled Charles Manson as a serial killer. He wasn't even a regular killer; he didn't kill anyone. He was more like a cult leader who convinced other people to kill for him.
Yeah, but it all feeds into violent and dominant behaviour which is the underlying point of the OP.

Also good personality = charismatic, not good as in kind and altruistic.
 
psilocybincel

psilocybincel

God's flesh
★★★
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Posts
264
Online
0
Yeah, but it all feeds into violent and dominant behaviour which is the underlying point of the OP.

Also good personality = charismatic, not good as in kind and altruistic.
The information in the article could all very well be very true, I just found that off-putting.
 
ColdLightOfDay

ColdLightOfDay

Serge’s alt.
★★★★★
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
5,851
Online
25d 14h 37m
The information in the article could all very well be very true, I just found that off-putting.
I know what you mean though, it’s annoying when a professional writer fucks up on a distinction you yourself recognise.
 
J

Just_another_cel

Recruit
★★★★★
Joined
May 2, 2018
Posts
416
Online
0
My morals are just a part of who I am. If it makes me even less desirable to women than I already am or have potential to earn less income, then so be it.
How old are you?
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
I don't know if I can trust this source anymore, seeing as they labeled Charles Manson as a serial killer. He wasn't even a regular killer; he didn't kill anyone. He was more like a cult leader who convinced other people to kill for him.
He still got love letters from female fans for being BEHIND the death of a few people. No fucking difference.

Look it up for yourself, serial killers do get lots of love letters. And charles manson was among them. Not believing a source because you don't follow their semantics is something only inceltear types would pull.
 
Last edited:
Blue Squirtle

Blue Squirtle

Banned
-
Joined
May 7, 2018
Posts
1,593
Online
3h 17m
They like them because they have status.
 
LittleBoy

LittleBoy

Luminary of the Incelosphere & Inceldom
★★★★★
Joined
Jul 8, 2018
Posts
12,199
Online
46d 14h 45m
The desire to expel unselfish members from the group.
Parks, Craig D.,Stone, Asako B.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 99(2), Aug 2010, 303-310
"An initial study investigating tolerance of group members who abuse a public good surprisingly showed that unselfish members (those who gave much toward the provision of the good but then used little of the good) were also targets for expulsion from the group...A fourth study suggested that the target is seen by some as establishing an undesirable behavior standard and by others as a rule breaker. Individuals who formed either perception expressed a desire for the unselfish person to be removed from the group."

To put it in simpler terms, being altruistic and friendly is just as likely to cause people to reject you as those who are completely selfish and purely look out for their needs only. The study found no significant difference. This contradicts the mainstream advice that having a "good personality" will cause people, including women, to like you. They will hate you just as much as someone who practically steals from them. This is also reflected in the workplace, as "agreeable" men (peaceful and friendly) are paid significantly less than their disagreeable counterparts.


"Overall, across the first three studies, men who are one standard deviation below the mean on agreeableness earn an average of 18.31% ($9,772) more than men one standard deviation above the mean on agreeableness. Meanwhile, the “disagreeableness premium” for women was only 5.47% ($1,828). Thus, the income premium for disagreeableness is more than three times stronger for men than for women."

So as we could see, the price of being nice when you are a man is a staggering 18% of your income throughout life. It is also far stronger in males than females. So this means that nice men in the first study would have been rejected even more often than the nice women. This suggests that nice men are rejected more often than men who are completely selfish and practically steal off of everyone. Now, let us focus more on the effects of being "mean" or "evil" on attracting a woman. "A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World's Largest Experiment Reveals about Human Desire" is a book by two neuroscientists that combines countless research by Alfred Kinsey and experiments found on the internet that has a data on over half a billion people to see what are the raw sexual desires of humanity. The book quotes quite a few unnerving conclusions of the sexuality of women based on many individual experiments:


“It turns out that killing people is an effective way to elicit the attention of many women: virtually every serial killer, including Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, and David Berkowitz, have received love letters from large numbers of female fans” (p. 98).
“[Their] inner cavewoman knows Doormat Man would become Sabertooth Tiger Lunch in short order” (p .97).

Psychology Today had an article that confirmed and analyzed how women desire men who are violent, mean, and show criminal behavior, with much thanks to the book mentioned above.


"women demonstrate a strong erotic preference for dominant men. Or toward what’s now commonly referred to as alpha males—in the authors’ words, men who are 'strong, confident, [and] swaggering [as in 'cocky,' and the pun is intended].' Unfortunately, what these descriptors often imply is behavior sufficiently bearish, self-centered, and insensitive as to often cross the line into a physical, mental, and emotional abuse that can be downright brutal."
"there’s something in their native wiring that makes a great many of them susceptible to 'bad boys.'"
"many women (at least secretly, or subliminally) can’t help but be drawn toward cold-blooded, controlling, 'bad boys' whose dominance symbolizes quite the opposite of what in relationships they’re consciously seeking."
"many women experience as enticing the idea of surrendering to a powerful male figure because of its very riskiness. Curiously, such an acutely felt threat can actually be eroticized by women’s minds into exceptional sexual excitement so compelling that (at least on a fantasy level) it’s almost irresistible."

Sources: https://www.amazon.com/Billion-Wicked-Thoughts-Largest-Experiment/dp/0525952098
https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-news/Documents/Nice--JPSPInPress.pdf
http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/a0018403
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evolution-the-self/201204/why-do-women-fall-serial-killers
 
psilocybincel

psilocybincel

God's flesh
★★★
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Posts
264
Online
0
He still got love letters from female fans for being BEHIND the death of a few people. No fucking difference.

Look it up for yourself, serial killers do get lots of love letters. And charles manson was among them. Not believing a source because you don't follow their semantics is something only inceltear types would pull.
Not necessarily. It wasn't just semantics, it was a blatantly wrong fact. Anyone could have made that mistake but it gives the impression that they don't know what they are talking about.
 
Creep

Creep

Blackpill Scientist
-
Joined
Apr 18, 2018
Posts
6,941
Online
0
Not necessarily. It wasn't just semantics, it was a blatantly wrong fact. Anyone could have made that mistake but it gives the impression that they don't know what they are talking about.
Even NYT and Independent refer to him as a serial killer or a murderer when doing articles focusing solely on him, because referring to him like that is not "blatantly wrong" (they even talked about how he just orchestrate the killings, but still refer to him as a serial killer nonetheless). Just lul at not trusting a book that was featured by the American Psychological Association because they grouped in Charles Manson with famous serial killers. That is extreme nitpicking, you would probably be surprised how often I catch misspellings in peer reviewed studies done by phds. Do you discredit them as well?
 
NeiboltStreet

NeiboltStreet

Officer
★★
Joined
Aug 10, 2018
Posts
627
Online
0
The desire to expel unselfish members from the group.
Parks, Craig D.,Stone, Asako B.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 99(2), Aug 2010, 303-310
"An initial study investigating tolerance of group members who abuse a public good surprisingly showed that unselfish members (those who gave much toward the provision of the good but then used little of the good) were also targets for expulsion from the group...A fourth study suggested that the target is seen by some as establishing an undesirable behavior standard and by others as a rule breaker. Individuals who formed either perception expressed a desire for the unselfish person to be removed from the group."

To put it in simpler terms, being altruistic and friendly is just as likely to cause people to reject you as those who are completely selfish and purely look out for their needs only. The study found no significant difference. This contradicts the mainstream advice that having a "good personality" will cause people, including women, to like you. They will hate you just as much as someone who practically steals from them. This is also reflected in the workplace, as "agreeable" men (peaceful and friendly) are paid significantly less than their disagreeable counterparts.


"Overall, across the first three studies, men who are one standard deviation below the mean on agreeableness earn an average of 18.31% ($9,772) more than men one standard deviation above the mean on agreeableness. Meanwhile, the “disagreeableness premium” for women was only 5.47% ($1,828). Thus, the income premium for disagreeableness is more than three times stronger for men than for women."

So as we could see, the price of being nice when you are a man is a staggering 18% of your income throughout life. It is also far stronger in males than females. So this means that nice men in the first study would have been rejected even more often than the nice women. This suggests that nice men are rejected more often than men who are completely selfish and practically steal off of everyone. Now, let us focus more on the effects of being "mean" or "evil" on attracting a woman. "A Billion Wicked Thoughts: What the World's Largest Experiment Reveals about Human Desire" is a book by two neuroscientists that combines countless research by Alfred Kinsey and experiments found on the internet that has a data on over half a billion people to see what are the raw sexual desires of humanity. The book quotes quite a few unnerving conclusions of the sexuality of women based on many individual experiments:


“It turns out that killing people is an effective way to elicit the attention of many women: virtually every serial killer, including Ted Bundy, Charles Manson, and David Berkowitz, have received love letters from large numbers of female fans” (p. 98).
“[Their] inner cavewoman knows Doormat Man would become Sabertooth Tiger Lunch in short order” (p .97).

Psychology Today had an article that confirmed and analyzed how women desire men who are violent, mean, and show criminal behavior, with much thanks to the book mentioned above.


"women demonstrate a strong erotic preference for dominant men. Or toward what’s now commonly referred to as alpha males—in the authors’ words, men who are 'strong, confident, [and] swaggering [as in 'cocky,' and the pun is intended].' Unfortunately, what these descriptors often imply is behavior sufficiently bearish, self-centered, and insensitive as to often cross the line into a physical, mental, and emotional abuse that can be downright brutal."
"there’s something in their native wiring that makes a great many of them susceptible to 'bad boys.'"
"many women (at least secretly, or subliminally) can’t help but be drawn toward cold-blooded, controlling, 'bad boys' whose dominance symbolizes quite the opposite of what in relationships they’re consciously seeking."
"many women experience as enticing the idea of surrendering to a powerful male figure because of its very riskiness. Curiously, such an acutely felt threat can actually be eroticized by women’s minds into exceptional sexual excitement so compelling that (at least on a fantasy level) it’s almost irresistible."

Sources: https://www.amazon.com/Billion-Wicked-Thoughts-Largest-Experiment/dp/0525952098
https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-news/Documents/Nice--JPSPInPress.pdf
http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/a0018403
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/evolution-the-self/201204/why-do-women-fall-serial-killers
It's truly over :(
 
psilocybincel

psilocybincel

God's flesh
★★★
Joined
Aug 13, 2018
Posts
264
Online
0
Even NYT and Independent refer to him as a serial killer or a murderer when doing articles focusing solely on him, because referring to him like that is not "blatantly wrong" (they even talked about how he just orchestrate the killings, but still refer to him as a serial killer nonetheless). Just lul at not trusting a book that was featured by the American Psychological Association because they grouped in Charles Manson with famous serial killers. That is extreme nitpicking, you would probably be surprised how often I catch misspellings in peer reviewed studies done by phds. Do you discredit them as well?
No, nor did I say that I descredited this source. I did not know that this is a common mistake other reliable sources have made, like the American Psychology Association. So you are correct then, in saying it is a semantical issue. There is still no evidence to suggest that Charles Manson fits the definition of a serial killer, yet he is commonly grouped with serial killers. Spelling errors are much different than semantical ones however. Unless a word has been so disfigured by misspelling that it cannot be determined what it was intended to say, the meaning of the text is not changed. Either way, both are unprofessional and caused me to quickly have doubts about its credibility, before I discovered how common of mistake this was. What if you were reading an article about famous composers and they mistakingly referred to Mozart as a composer of the Baroque era instead of the Classical era? You would be turned off by the sources unprofessionalism, correct?

In regards to the article, I believe it is very possible that the information contained in it is true. My only opposition to it is that it goes against the mathematician John Nash's game theory, which states that in any competative game the best outcome for you is not doing what is best for yourself, but doing what is best for yourself, and doing equally what is best for the members of the group who are playing the game. This isn't just some philosophical idea either; it's mathematically provable. Now with that being said, if we imagine life as a game in which the end goal is reproduction and the passing on of one's genes, it would harm someone's chances, as well as others, to be too selfish or too selfless. This applies to evolutionary biology as well if it is viewed as a game with the same end goal, and all variables are accounted for. This is called "evolution game theory" This is all just a hypothetical sociological scenario I have set up though. It may not work like this now because, there is no one saying that we are winning the game. This article has data that suggest that it is not working like this at the moment. We could very well be losing the game as a species, and that is because a factor like this has changed due to our technological advances or some other factors.
*I made an error above.
I meant to say that in some ways it goes against game theory and in other ways confirms it.
But I agree with you, and in most ways I think you are correct. I am being extremely nitpicky. I just like long debates because I learn more that way, and gain nuance.
I also like to read peer reviewed studies, especially medical or pharmacological ones on ncbi, and I have encountered the same thing you described. Just because it is peer reviewed does not make it excempt from bias. It should make it exempt from bias, but some things are simply too touchy for people. A good example of this is the famous study which is now widely discredited, that 'marijuana kills brain cells'. This involved experiments in dogs were exposed in a box to highly concentrsted marijuana smoke and suffered hypoxia and thus, brain damage. But at the time, and even now if the person is stupid enough, this was cited as a study which gave an excuse for someone's political agenda to be less opposed by the general public who believed in the study. Of course, this rarely occurs except for touchy touchy subjects.
And the topic of the article you posted is very, very touchy. Just why it seemed suspicious. Though it is not, you are right.
 
Last edited: