Oh, not that one again. ‘Correlation is not causation’ is not the same thing as ‘correlation is never causation’.
Correlation sometimes is causation. If you give someone a pill and they get better then it’s either reversion to the mean, or it’s the pill. Correlation is causation when the effect is so large that there is no other plausible explanation except the pill.
Why not just go and read the paper instead of carrying on this back-and-forth about your opinion? Why not critique the clinical trials instead of handwaving about ‘anecdotes’? You don’t even know what the results are or how they were obtained.