That might be of interest to you in general, but it's not terribly relevant to this particular discussion. Things that would be relevant would be things like correlations of conflict of interest and measured effect size in the direction you'd predict if the conflict was governing the outcome--that's a case where disclosure is deemed to be important, so there's some chance of assessing it and the impact on outcome.

I'm not sure why you ascribe my disagreement with your assertion to a failure to understand it, though.

You're making a very straightforward claim; am I not making a straightforward counterclaim which, if true, renders your claim moot?

The usual way to proceed is not "LMAO, you don't get it" but "here is a rebuttal to your counterclaim".