It's becoming obvious that you (1) Have not read or do not understand the methods and results in this paper, (2) you refuse to cite specific sections of the article with which you disagree and (3) are not willing to bring any evidence beyond a long string of "nuh uh" responses.

I can't believe I've entertained explaining what controlling for a variable means, which is concerning. If you want to bring up specific quotes/sections or bring in counter facts, then by all means, I'll address them. I am a global health statistician, so I'm happy to help clear up some questions. I invite you to bring something substantive to the table.

If you still have a meaningful problem with the methodology of this article that was published in The Lancet, then I look forward to your publication that overturns the results./s All the data is available online.