_cnt0

It's a difficult problem to navigate, especially as you need to have it work for such a big and diverse audience.

That's a very polite way of saying that part of the target audience are idiots.

Yah, or maybe because it smells like bullshit. All data is based on surveys from “normal” people (non-scientists), on a topic that is highly politicized, and by practitioners of one side often followed with what looks like religious fervor. The participants distribution is neither 50/50 for the compared options nor representative for the general populace of cat owners. It is pretty safe to assume bias in the reporting. Not a single cat was actually examined by the “researchers”. This has almost all the hallmarks of bad science. That it is published in a purportedly peer reviewed magazine, does not reflect well on that magazine.