Yeah I guess my hot-take is that exaggerating summary articles maybe shouldn't exist at all, or not be shared on HN. What I've found is that, and this article is a great example, the summarizing article is more likely to lead to a less accurate picture than no article at all.

"Puberty hasn't changed" is not what this article concludes. And rightly so, because that's much too broad a statement do draw from taking 13 paleolithic skeletons.