The claims of the actual paper are much more nuanced and not anything near how the BBC headline frames it. I think this is more a case of bad science reporting than bad science.
Appending the ‘big’ from e.g. Big Tobacco/Pharma/Sugar to unlikely things is one of my favourite occasional jokes. I especially appreciate the double joke with Big Bird :)
The claims of the actual paper are much more nuanced and not anything near how the BBC headline frames it. I think this is more a case of bad science reporting than bad science.
https://www.jneurosci.org/content/46/12/e1307252026