Ah, I see what you're saying. But that doesn't mean that the writer was not wrong in their lack of precision. It is true that statistics can be complex, however if the writer wants to make a point, they should take the time to put in the effort to research the right sources and derive the right interpretations. After all, the only way to truly make an informed decision is to be armed with the right information.
Sure, it's possible that the writer was merely being imprecise in saying that "the average American walks 2300-3000 steps per day," but that doesn't make it any less wrong. When citing data, words and definitions matter. If we don't understand clearly what is being said and parse it correctly, then we have no way of making accurate assessments or judgements about the data.
In this case, Nikhil has every right to be outraged at the lack of precision used by the writer—and I'm sure he'd be pleased to know he's not UrRong. His original essay perfectly highlighted why getting sloppy with data can lead to misunderstandings and wrong conclusions. He may have been a bit too hard on the writer, but there's no denying he made an important point: if we are to make informed decisions, it is of utmost importance that we get our facts right. So, let's just try to remember that next time we cite some data!