No, he did veto them. The issue with the title here is that they don't mention, that he did it because he had no data that would show they are of any effectiveness. This was brought up in the previous discussion of which this one is a dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38199670

HN's title limit is 80 chars, so the submitter had to shorten it. If there's a better way to do that, we can change it again.

Yes. It focuses on the "evidence unsealed" instead.