Why does ReadyNAS recommend not to use RAID 5 with 8 disks

Thanks!

So I found this article interesting: https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/

And in particular:

"The crux of the problem RAID arrays are groups of disks with special logic in the controller that stores the data with extra bits so the loss of 1 or 2 disks won't destroy the information (I'm speaking of RAID levels 5 and 6, not 0, 1 or 10). The extra bits - parity - enable the lost data to be reconstructed by reading all the data off the remaining disks and writing to a replacement disk.

2 hundred million sectors is about 12 terabytes. When a drive fails in a 7 drive, 2 TB SATA disk RAID 5, you'll have 6 remaining 2 TB drives. As the RAID controller is reconstructing the data it is very likely it will see an URE. At that point the RAID reconstruction stops.

Here's the math: (1 - 1 /(2.4 x 10^10)) ^ (2.3 x 10^10) = 0.3835

You have a 62% chance of data loss due to an uncorrectable read error on a 7 drive RAID with one failed disk, assuming a 10^14 read error rate and ~23 billion sectors in 12 TB. Feeling lucky?"

But is this true? Sure from a mathematical perspective, but:

1. Does RAID reconstruction stop if an URE occurs? I would have though it retries a number of times and then "continues on error". Can any one at Netgear confirm the behaviour in this case?
2. Doesn't scrubbing help with read errors / bit rot? I test disks monthly. And scrub volumes weekly. Should this not help with preventing/mitigating UREs?
3. Modern disks have a higher throughput then these old articles assumed. So the time taken to rebuild a 12TB HDD will be much quicker than what they were predicting, no?

In my case I only ever add files, never modify or delete. Think videos and photos.

It would be good to get Netgear's perspective and experience on this...