I'm no longer sure what you're arguing for.

I claim that if your claim is that there are multiple cite-worthy studies that are easily findable, your first choice of an example shouldn't be a non-scientific source as evidence that there are multiple cite-worthy studies that are easily findable.

Furthermore, I take it as obvious that where there isn't a lot of high quality, cite-worthy studies out there, that the source he provided is a fine source to use. After all, we have to use the data that we have and assign appropriate confidence to it.

But we are not talking about a naturopath but about a data driven business.

I wasn't intending to imply that the quality distance between a data driven business and whatever the current state of scientific studies is the same as the quality distance between a naturopath and an MD.

I was stating that in the universe where there are multiple easily findable cite-worthy studies, a blog post using OkCupid data was below a cite-worthy study in the same manner a naturopath is below an MD.