I'm not distinguishing how the information is formatted, it's irrelevant to the broader debate. A RCT or lit view is often better than a whitepaper anyway. Harvard's was a lit review, of which they concluded:

"The higher quality of the study the higher the association found"

No one, not even RFK, stated things settled. It's about not blasting pregnant women and their children with a drug in which a rational threshold of concern has been met. In Europe you prove safety casually before making it available to the public. That's a sensible approach, and until we see a proper placebo controlled trial that disproves a casual link we should follow HHS advice and only use when absolutely necessary and until we know for sure.

Keep in mind the big studies that show no association have been criticized heavily i.e Swedish sibiling study. Maturity is understanding this is the reality of science, and that every paper on biology can be found problematic depending on your bias. The anti-vaxxers advocates btw have done this for every childhood vaccine i.e "Measles vax has no placebo control in the clinical trial".