John @johnbishop , with all the crap floating around the internet, you should point out that NIH doesn't vet any of those articles on its website. If you read the disclaimer you'll see that the cited article needs only to be "published by academic publishers or institutions, scholarly societies, or government and non-governmental organizations." that apply to NIH as a publication, not each individual article. It is up to the original publication to decide if the study and/or conclusions merit scientific consideration. In my opinion, the first article (34509062) does not. It's poorly translated (AI anyone?) and one word can completely change the meaning of a scientifically precise statement. Plus, it does not meet the criteria of a "Valid" scientific study. (I.E. 16 people all from the same hospital, all Type 2 ...) A cursory read of the abstract will show that it is not to be taken seriously.