I think you're missing the point here. It's not a question of whether Dr. Thorpe is an "esteemed scientist" or not. The "proof is in the pudding"--i.e., the data from the trials--not in the medical/scientific explanation of the MOA or the results from animal studies.
Actually, I was purposefully trying to stay away from all that because it would not be a meaningful discussion. It almost never is, which is truly sad.
I just wanted to give people some general resources to see how other scientists rate their colleagues.