Reading it now with hindsight, the linked article in itself still seems pretty reasonable.
In a world full of dumb people, you might expect a media overreaction to something like this.
A whole bunch of people instead just going the opposite way and calling it all a hoax seems a bit harder to predict. And in the context of that insanity his words do seem to be supporting the deniers, but I'm guessing their points are generally less nuanced than "we don't have much gold standard randomised trial evidence for many of these interventions, and we'd be in a better position to plan if we did".
