We've been down this road before.
I'm happy to wait for a peer reviewed article in a reputable journal. The simple fact that this team is promoting their work through mass media rather than the proper route for serious research says it all.
You don't need big money to get important research published - the journals would bite your arm off. The truth is that double blind peer review can be a painful experience, especially if it exposes poor methodology.
When I was an editor, I was once sent a study for potential publication: the authors had set up the study on the cheap, and there were glaring holes in the methodology. Essentially, they simply couldn't justify any of their claims. I rang the lead author to explain why we couldn't publish it. "What do you want me to change?" he asked. "it doesn't work like that", I had to tell him. Months later, I saw the study - rewritten, with a different methodology, in a 'less than reputable' journal.
Standards are high in research circles, and we should be deeply suspicious of anyone who tries to circumvent them.