I am not fond of the author's substitute suggestion - "Scientists: Snake Oil Doesn’t Work". This turns scientists into a priesthood of experts, and that is not what science is about.

Science is a process, not an authority. We should not "trust the science". We should analyse and question it for ourselves.

I think the essential problem with the style of journalism from the article is that it reduces the substance of stories into an appeal-to-authority. It is not a trustworthy authority - there is plenty of history for people employed as scientists to make assertions that now look ridiculous.

Journalists should put more focus to the arguments and less to the conclusions.