No, OP seemingly can't read.

The paper states:

ARRs tend to be ignored because they give a much less impressive effect size than RRRs

and then goes on to note the ARRs, which are the single digit percentages.

"We don't use ARRs because they're shitty measures, here are these shitty measures."

The question now becomes, do other studies use ARR and confirm in any way the claim that ARRs are a poor measure of efficacy?