Another Local News Fail

I've been trying to think of a way to put the quote from one of the referenced articles in that story, "The study claims to have employed an innovative method in detecting 'a significant quantity of carcinogenic molecules' in the vapour of the cigarettes which, according to Laurenceau, have thus far gone undetected.", into the proper context.

Anyone who knows something about science knows that quote screams that it is a BS study, but I'm trying to think of a way to explain that to folks who don't know that an "innovative method in detecting" has to be proven to be reliable before using said new method to disprove all previous detection and measuring studies that spelled out what proven methods were used. None of the reference links contain methodology which is another warning sign that the "study" is BS masquerading as science.

Also note they didn't use the "innovative method" to retest cigarette data, but compared the results of the "innovative method" to the old methods' results.