Assuming I'm questioning the unfounded claim is not the issue. I'm quoting the site's guidelines because the poster copied verbatim the message I was responding to. This is either quite snarky or assumes very low reading ability on my part.

In short the exchange was:

A: "The claims are unfounded because the FDA found no causal link."

B: "The claims might not be unfounded because the absence of evidence of a causal link is not sufficient to qualify them as such, as is evident by this legal precedent and my personal experience."

C: "`the FDA found no causal link.`"

I hope this clarifies things, I'm afraid we're getting very meta.