This sounds to me very much like a political debate between people arguing for the best method, rather than focusing on the results that you can get with either method.

As long as this debate is still fuelled by emotional and political discourse, nothing useful will come out of it.

What is really needed is an assessment which method is best suited for which cases.

The practitioner wants to know “which approach should I use”, not “which camp is the person I’m listening to in?”