So let's ignore all possible confounders, don't even start asking questions, and focus on some random detail because my supervisor is a huge fan of it.
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
https://n.neurology.org/content/early/2022/10/05/WNL.0000000...
Unless you have good reason you ought not be so uncharitable. Have you good reason?
When I see such studies, on closer inspection, they often turn out to be crap. It could be this really is a gem among a pile of gravels (my apologies if that were the case) but I'm sceptical.
Observational studies are less good at showing causation, sure.
Whilst I can't see the original article, the news summary insinuated a dose related effect. A sample size of >2000 is also decent.
Naturally in an ideal world you'd want a 3 arm, 20 year long, randomised placebo controlled double blinded study. But who would ever 1. Pay for it, 2. Wait that long.