I personally don't trust the little (probably superficial) insights I have into the topic enough to be able to gauge this; neither do I have the energy to put into discerning slop creators doing it for clickbait with some backyard engineering or genuinely correct amateurs.

I like to outsource that to proper channels, I understand that it's probably not 100% fair every single time, but as I said, I have neither time nor energy to judge it properly myself

Sorry, but it's more like a crab apple.

It looks like an apple, it's presented like an apple, it's advertised like an apple because that is what makes the YouTuber money. But scientific methods and standards exist for a reason. It's very easy to produce bad data and especially easy to extract bad conclusions from data if you have an incentive to do so (such as a fan base who might engage with the video less if the conclusions were against their expectations)

There's a chance that this guy's conclusions reflect what a proper study might have found, but it's just too hard to tell if it's a crab apple or not it's essentially probably a little better than chance.