Figure 1A shows 120 cases from 2019 with no known link to the market, yet they cluster about the market. So the allegation of ascertainment bias does not appear to be substantiated.
Further, the criticism of rewording "these analyses provide dispositive evidence" to "these results provide incontrovertible evidence" is bizarre. The term "dispositive" in this context is equivalent to "the last and final word" which in a scientific context was rightfully removed, though it was replaced by a strong assertion.
With these two matters, I did not think the author has sufficient credibility for me to further investigate their claims.
Further, the criticism of rewording "these analyses provide dispositive evidence" to "these results provide incontrovertible evidence" is bizarre. The term "dispositive" in this context is equivalent to "the last and final word" which in a scientific context was rightfully removed, though it was replaced by a strong assertion.
With these two matters, I did not think the author has sufficient credibility for me to further investigate their claims.