I don't get your point. Cryptography (especially new protocols such as SIKE or anything PQ) must undergo public scrutiny for years or decades, and sometimes get

I don't get your point. Cryptography (especially new protocols such as SIKE or anything PQ) must undergo public scrutiny for years or decades, and sometimes get destroyed in the process, that's how it works. Coming up with a usable public key scheme not trivially insecure is already incredibly difficult. Also, while the attack here is devastating there is no blame to put on SIKE authors: the field is immensely vast, complex and abstract, no one can know everything. The attack relies on a somewhat recent result that is definitely not classical crypto textbook. Furthermore the cryptosystems used by these companies are the ones that have been tested and standardized through the years, not the brand new algorithm designed by cryptographers (as new algorithms must be scrutinized first). Also, as another commenter suggests cryptographers are not the ones in charge of the actual implementation at their companies. Finally, you are making a big confusion between cryptography and security.