At an individual level, sure - there is tons of conflicting information out there so you just need to use your best judgement to decide what to do for you.
At a broader level, though, I am certainly not happy this erroneous study got my (and many other people's) attention, because it's conclusions were complete bullshit. I don't understand these kinds of unscientific apologetics - it's the exact same kind of thinking that leads people down the road of "Sure, that study of vaccine implications in autism may have been completely fraudulent, but I'm still glad it got my attention because it informed me of all the random chemicals in vaccines!"
I personally did not ditch my plastic cookware, and I'm glad I didn't, because so far there is zero actual evidence that one needs to.
On the flipside, blindly accepting industry safety standards is how we ended up with lead paint and asbestos everywhere. Insufficient evidence of harm is not the same as proof of no harm.
We can live in a world of nuance where we refute the specific claims of this study while still making choices to proactively avoid potential harm from plastic products. Many other valid studies are finding microplastic in our bodies and environment at levels we didn't remotely suspect before.
At a broader level, though, I am certainly not happy this erroneous study got my (and many other people's) attention, because it's conclusions were complete bullshit. I don't understand these kinds of unscientific apologetics - it's the exact same kind of thinking that leads people down the road of "Sure, that study of vaccine implications in autism may have been completely fraudulent, but I'm still glad it got my attention because it informed me of all the random chemicals in vaccines!"
I personally did not ditch my plastic cookware, and I'm glad I didn't, because so far there is zero actual evidence that one needs to.