▁his ▁data ▁were ▁not ▁appreci ably ▁different ▁than ▁random ▁coin ▁toss ing ... Extra ordinary ▁claims ▁require ▁extraordinary ▁evidence , ▁and ▁yet ▁Paul ' s ▁paper ▁is ▁extra ordin arily ▁weak ." ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 1 6 , ▁Andreas ▁M ok ros ▁and ▁El mar ▁Hab erm ey er , ▁sex ▁research ers ▁at ▁the ▁University ▁Hospital ▁of ▁Zur ich ▁used ▁Fed or off ' s ▁original ▁data ▁and ▁applied ▁statistical ▁mod elling ▁of ▁Fed or off ' s ▁method ▁to ▁test ▁its ▁valid ity . ▁ ▁Their ▁results ▁verified ▁the ▁previous ▁critic isms , ▁showing ▁directly ▁that ▁Fed or off ' s ▁method ▁was ▁invalid ▁and ▁that ▁his ▁reported ▁finding ▁was ▁actually ▁a ▁statistical ▁arte fact , ▁ind ist ingu ish able ▁from ▁random ▁variation . ▁ ▁Fed or off ▁dismiss ed ▁the ▁anal ys es ▁and ▁critic isms , ▁however , ▁saying ▁they ▁" are ▁concerns ▁to ▁be ▁raised ▁about ▁any ▁un - rep licated ▁study " ▁and ▁asking ▁" Why ▁all ▁the ▁f uss ▁about ▁this ▁one , ▁especially ▁since ▁the ▁news ▁appears ▁to ▁be ▁good ?" ▁ ▁In ▁ 2 0 1 7 , ▁Fed or off ▁and ▁the ▁R OM HC ▁continued ▁their ▁claims ▁of ▁success ▁( called ▁a ▁" bo ast " ▁by ▁the ▁National ▁Post ). ▁According ▁to ▁Fed or off , ▁" We ▁have ▁evidence ▁all ▁day ▁from ▁people ▁who ▁say ▁they ’ ve ▁got ten ▁better ..... Pe ople ▁always ▁come ▁back ▁saying ▁‘ This ▁is ▁much ▁better , ▁I ▁enjoy ▁this