That's not the direct evidence. You just say, there, "There are strong arguments that as much as 90% of all medical research is fake, biased or flawed."

Same claim, not actual evidence.

If you follow your links from there, you find a Reason article where the author says, "In an email exchange with me, Ioannidis estimated that the nonreplication rates in biomedical observational and preclinical studies could be as high as 90 percent."

That isn't "all medical research". You made that up, or don't understand what counts as medical research.

And your claim here was "shows 90% of all scientific research is biased and/or flawed". You expanded a particular type of medical research, speculated upon by one particular author (who has done great work on replication, but also has some biases towards thinking that things are worse than they are), into "all scientific research".

Please curate your thought processes more carefully. This is really bad. You are part of the 97.4%!

(Citation: I just made up that number right now, which I can do, because it's self-proving.)