Statisticians know some great facts about the link between tobacco and cancer (shame about Ronald Fisher, though).
The only remaining problem is how to convince others. It goes through the same steps as the Harford article, this time from the perspective of the political Left.
But given that the entire field is now in serious doubt, I feel like it would have been judicious to mention some of this in the article.
This is especially true given that the article itself is about the way that false ideas spread by people never double-checking their beliefs.
If you get good documentary-makers, I assume both will be equally convincing regardless of what the true facts are. The first because Harford’s stronger statements about facts are probably exaggerations, and he just meant that in certain cases people ignore evidence.
The second because the specific study cited wasn’t the one that failed to replicate and Harford’s thesis might be that it was different enough from the original that it’s probably true.