The stats and the philosophies don't match. We have several members here who espouse the 'Limping makes baby Jesus cry', school of thought, yet their stats show they limp often. I know, I've got stats on a whole lot of them.
That said, we all have to realize that there are dangers in limping that just flat do not have to exist. Those same dangers exist with min raising. We should want to get any situation thinned out as much as possible, thinned to the point of singularity ideally (singularity means you are the only one left in the pot). But HU, when you are not bluffing
Limping tends to just weasel away my stack, however if you see me min-raise, understand I have monsters. <<<--- That is the official memo.
The way poker is played these days (subject to change any of these days), is that it makes more sense to limp with monsters, and overbet bluffs. Both have dangers of course, but more people have fear/respect for aggression than have a fear of the maniacal limper. Thus we are more likely to thin the field with aggression, thus scooping the pot, than we are with our monsters surviving a school of limpers.