> The most rigorous evidence comes from a 2018 whole-population study tracking nearly half a million children born in Western Australia between 1980 and 2001. Of those, 1,870 developed schizophrenia, but not one of the 66 children with cortical blindness did.

1870/500,000 * 66 = 0.247

Not a single blind child getting it is the most likely outcome, and this is called "the most rigorous evidence"?

It didn't protect rats in a study https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09209...

There sure is a lot of reported cases of all sorts of blindness with schizophrenia, constantly shrinking the pool of types of the two, making this conjecture constantly shrinking https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4246684/

It also seems the Australia study does not quite say what the article claims it does - a follow-up study: https://jmsgr.tamhsc.edu/the-lack-of-comorbidity-between-ear...

Too bad this article simply doesn't mention all this. Of course the article will get less clicks with a less wild title.