Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comment you replied to has nothing to do with "correlation does not equal causation". The point was that fishing for results, by trying everything, is guaranteed to find something. So if, in a study like this, they looked at differences in morality rate between: 1) men and women, 2) younger and older people, 3) younger and older surgeons, 4) surgeries in summer vs winter 4) surgeries in morning vs evening 5) etc…
Why are you and others assuming this was the case and it wasn't the original hypothesis they had in mind? They explain the reasoning for selecting this hypothesis to test: >Operations performed on birthdays of surgeons might provide a unique opportunity to assess the relationship between personal distractions and patient outcomes, under the hypothesis that surgeons may be more likely to become distracted or feel rush…
Incidentally, interestingly, that is how bias in real world often works - people making different assumptions for different groups in absence of evidence.