If it wasn’t peer reviewed, there’s nothing to debate.
Just because a study was not peer reviewed does not mean that it is not valid, especially at a time when there is a massive amount of research being done and published in every scientist's hurry to get their study published first. The peer review process takes a lot of time and those peer review articles you are raving about may not be published for over a year or more. Furthermore the peer review process is intended to review the methodology of the research and not the conclusions. A statistical study can be rigorous and have totally spurious results.
It's like the double blind placebo controlled studies for the use hydroxychloroquin (sp?) that some doctors are saying that must be done before anyone can use it. Anecdotal information has thus far been proven to be right about its use.
