[acqq]

That link has only one comment. Actual discussion with 390 comments is:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24366006

and my comment there:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24366933

In short, my problem with that paper is:

"The whole paper contains neither raw data nor any graphs and only means and standard deviations"

Given small number of people in the study, it's not clear that there aren't some problems that aren't visible when reporting the means which would be obvious when looking at the actual data.

Even the randomized studies aren't "true" automatically: the process of randomization can have issues itself, and that should be also possible to check.