The comments section for that letter are interesting. Peer review at work.
The problem with this whole situation is at the cats out of the bag once these bogus studies get published somewhere even remotely reputable.
Hell, a percentage of people (and sadly not a small one) looking for a story / study to fit their narrative will believe a study they found *anywhere*, even pseudoscientific nonsense from YouTube or whatever. But when it’s posted on something that should be reasonably reputable, it grows many extra sets of legs and will never die, even if it’s retracted after the fact.
And worse yet when that happens, a portion of the conspiracy theorists will just say that it was killed / retracted / removed because of whatever conspiracy theory suits their needs that day of the week.