The claim emerges again, but this time with a new twist!
The author, Michelle Schoffro Cook didn't even read the paper, but is happy to lend her opinions that further advance this misinformation, along with a dandy of a tangential spin. How do I know she didn't read it? She notes in her analysis that it was published in the journal Nature. It was not. Nature wouldn't touch this paper with a 10 impact factor pole.
It is not a bad paper. It is not a good paper. I would not have done the experiments that way, but the authors reported how they did it and only slightly overstepped the data in their Discussion.
The problem is the university communications office that turned a few data points into a national culinary catastrophe.