At this point, a study which concludes the opposite has to bring the proverbial extraordinary evidence. We aren't even close to that point. There's a heckuva

At this point, a study which concludes the opposite has to bring the proverbial extraordinary evidence. We aren't even close to that point. There's a heckuva lot that we still don't know about this virus. That paper was update, what, 30 June? They even admitted that they were using their earlier conclusions to create filters for the new literature they were reviewing- in effect building their own echo chamber. As long a the study is competently run and has reasoned conclusions it should be considered.