Do curators agree that here is enough evidence to treat it as a confirmed connection? A Belgian, Jean-Paul Mulder, said in as late as 2008 that the DNA profiles investigated in these cases were significantly different. Sure, the story is probably newsworthy, but does that also make it a true story? I'd argue that this connection has yet to be proven.
Le Point on Jean-Marie Loret
2012-02-17 : EXCLUSIF LE POINT.FR. Le fils français caché d'Adolf Hitler
2008-04-24 : Hitler had geen joods bloed en geen Franse zoon
After four years, there is still no serious evidence for this claim, and the historical and genetic genealogy communities have dismissed it. I really don't think this profile should remain connected to Adolf Hitler. Can we cut it and add him to our Imposters project?
All humans fall into four blood groups, meaning that being in the same blood group is nothing remarkable at all. (All of us in this thread could be in the same group.) The type of graphology used in that study is considered a pseudoscience, which is one of the reasons that study has been so widely dismissed.
I'm going to cut the connection for now. I respect all of our collaborators x but it seems silly to continue propagating this tale with no concrete evidence. If the rest of the historical and genealogical community does not accept this man's claim, we shouldn't be promoting it as fact either.