Oil is like a religion. Everyone has an opinion about it, even if they don't share it. So discussing it always leads to a plethora of interesting views.
A tablespoon of the OLD GM E.O.S. per oil change. I've had no issues so far, and I got plenty of EOS left, so believe whichever wives' tale you want. I even put just a couple of teaspoons in the 87 and it has a roller cam. Just because if makes me feel better. I know not to go too much so I don't risk clogging the cat, but still. I'm not going to buy any of the VR1 oil as long as I got some of this stuff to use. Does it work? I dunno. Maybe only in my mind, but I'm not going to worry too much about it at this point. I've already got it, and I'm going to continue to use it.
The problem I have with these so-called "articles" is that some of them are potentially "fake news". They're written in ways to sway your thinking to their own agenda, even if they don't blatantly mislead. The old, "Well, I talked to so and so, and he's a nuclear biometric oil lubrication engineer, and he said...." It's the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy. This doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true. It just means that by accepting whatever this single "expert" says as gospel doesn't mean it isn't false, either. I would need more corroboration.
Note in the article, it doesn't mention any specific method of zinc introduction or what type. Did he mean some of those specific zinc additives that contain zinc by the bucketful or some of the stuff like Lucas and GM EOS stuff? Or something else? It generalizes too much IMO. While I think some of it is true, I don't feel one article tells the entire story either. I do agree if you can get the manufacturers to put in zinc during manufacturing, it's better overall. It's like trying to mix your own formulation of Coca-Cola. Coke will always do it better than you.