Ask the author. The paper says they had full access to their data. They might be able to pass an anonymised version of that along. They might even be willing.

Ask the author. The paper says they had full access to their data. They might be able to pass an anonymised version of that along. They might even be willing. The process of scientific discussion (that you "don't trust") is just how science works. I suspect what you actually dislike is the way these papers are cross-reported. It's one thing to be featured in a relevant journal, it's another to be syndicated as "THE CURE FOR DEMENTIA" by a much higher-level journal (or heavens forbid, a newspaper... or worse). You can blame the sponsors and drug companies for that. Neither of which really seem to be involved here.