If I independently knew which part was correct, I would have had no need to consult ChatGTP.
However, that said, I think it's intuitively obvious that the scope and pattern of effect of the COL24A1 WT carrier correlations go far, far beyond a random false positive. In theory, a false positive is one and done -- not over and over again in the same direction, in a coherent pattern indistinguishable from a highly therapeutic result across domains and even time.
As far as the size of the gene pool surveyed, I would love to have Anavex give its size; there would be no need to guess. However, we do know from public materials it was highly targeted. The ChatGTP estimate can be off in either direction, but because it's neither a prediction nor a value judgment, and because I was easily able to create a neutral inquiry, I trust it isn't a fantasy.
Further, when I asked ChatGTP for its sources, it produced them. The range in its answer resulted from having to guess how much the two restricting factors Anavex identified overlap with each other.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
