[acqq]

> a research paper (admittedly an unreviewed preprint)

As Dr. Fauci would say, it doesn't matter, even if it were a peer reviewed it can still be bad. (1)

There are a lot of bad studies, especially on the "preprint servers" that in more quiet times would not appear at all, or which nobody would take a bit serious. Now there is a lot of wishful thinking or bias involved even in their perception.

The scientific process doesn't protect anybody from some studies simply being bad, the process is there that eventually the bad ones are going to not be reconfirmed, and the really good ones are those that have many confirmations and have even the power to make new predictions, that remain true.

There are known issues with these studies claiming different "strains" too easily.

1) https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/dr-fauci-hydroxychloroq...