Cultural education of children among hunter-gatherers

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/11/241119132717.htm
The first thing that should be considered is the disconcerting fact of how bankrupt the study of cultural anthropology has had to be to have not realized these behaviors much earlier if these findings are something worth making claims about at this time.  How blind to reality could these anthropologists potentially be in making the claims that they are making?  Just as blind as those that came before them?
Their claims are based on observations that should have been made centuries ago.  How sad does that make the entire field of cultural anthropology?
I know that I am biased.  As an undergraduate at Berkeley I took enough lower and upper division anthropology classes to get an AB (the BS degree that the College of Letters and Science gave out) if I would just take lower division cultural anthropology and upper division cultural anthropology.  I had two years to complete those two classes, but I refused to do it mainly because I was only interested in getting a BS degree in Genetics from the college of Natural Resources, but cultural anthropology at the time was just bad science.  I had no interest in taking any cultural anthropology courses.  It was basically the Margaret Mead generation of cultural anthropology.
Read the science daily article and try to figure out what should not have been common knowledge centuries ago?
We just seem to be unable to study ourselves objectively and intelligently.  Did these researchers succeed?  Is there something that they are still missing?  Are they coming to the wrong conclusions?
Ron Okimoto