Based on your logic of "if X can no longer be Y". Or are only statisticians/analysts somehow effected by this?

You didn't support your argument with any explanation, so there's no room for "wow" non-statements when people interpret your argument in a way that you don't understand.

Your argument appeared to be that someone who is an activist can't also have a role that requires discipline and focus while interpreting messy data. In that case, there's no difference between that person being a data scientist or a medical professional.

Do you care to expand on your argument, and perhaps provide support as to why, for example, it's okay for a medical professional to also be an activist but not for a data scientist or tax accountant? Where's the line, and why?

I think they were saying that scientists who work around politicized topics are disregarded as scientists when they do any activism.