[inter_netuser]

Not commenting on the particular issue/article, but can we dispense with blind faith in pre-prints as gospel and final instance of truth?

"This article is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice."

Consider all pre-prints complete bunk until proven otherwise. Anyone can publish whatever they want to support whatever conclusion they want in a pre-print.

[maxerickson]

I object to your characterization of my posting the link as "blind faith", and that I have somehow adopted it as gospel.

It's an analysis of an interesting data set and the conclusion isn't unreasonable.