>It probably also opens us to accusations of mishandled data / bad interpretation by the company, though?
Isn't that how science works? I also don't think they're called accusations.
You work with data and you state something based on that data. Someone else may point out that some steps of the process are flawed, or the data is flawed. That's the very nature of this.
Depends on who makes the claim, I guess. We are absolutely not afraid of scientific reviews. We're afraid of potential legal reviews made in bad faith. A company doesn't have to win a legal case to win against researchers, they just have to make a fuss.
Isn't that how science works? I also don't think they're called accusations.
You work with data and you state something based on that data. Someone else may point out that some steps of the process are flawed, or the data is flawed. That's the very nature of this.