Paper is here and it's very, uhhhh, preclinical. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2021/01/22/science.abf4058
With the caveat that I'm very dumb, nearly always wrong, and only capable of communicating with emojis, it looks like the clinical evidence may be overstated. Here are the links they provide to the studies they cite, result-free as of today.
Ultimately i think this is good basic science, done properly and honestly as far as I can tell. The issue here is in folks getting waaaaay ahead of the evidence and treating this as an answer rather than a question.
As ever.
End rant.
As ever.
End rant.