This paragraph elaborates on the claim, adding weasel-words like "the scientists say" to shift responsibility for establishing the likely truth or accuracy of the research findings on to absolutely anybody else but me, the journalist.
If the quoted paragraphs are from different parts of the article, I will put a sentence here to separate them.
In this paragraph I will reference or quote some minor celebrity, historical figure, eccentric, or a group of sufferers; because my editors are ideologically committed to the idea that all news stories need a "human interest", and I'm not convinced that the scientists are interesting enough.
Down here I might try to answer the obvious question from someone who isn't going to go read the linked article, then I suggest you go to the link and read the rest. Clicking this link will take you to the original article -via reddit
I will probably point out various flaws in the methodology of the various studies cited by the research article.
I will comment on all the comments made so far, no matter how irrelevant, disagreeing with the bulk of them, but being sure to mention that one or two of the previous commenter have made good points n order to let everyone know that I am not just arguing for the sake of arguing (which I am).
Perhaps I will even somehow manage to link the research article to an irrelevant yet controversial topic such as the banning of the burqua in order to incite more arguing. I will then save this page to my favourites and revisit it frequently, viciously defending my arguments to anyone who dares question my logic.
I do not know the meaning of conciseness. My comment is multiple paragraphs long and as a result most people will never read it.
Due to your overzealous grammar expectations, I shall invoke Godwin's Law and state your efforts to be those of the Nazis.