Edwards Lifesciences is a company that makes medical devices to help people's hearts. They recently reported that they made less money than people thought they would, and their sales were also lower than expected. This made some people who watch the stock market worried, so they changed their predictions about how much the company's stock will be worth in the future. Some of them think the stock will be worth less, and some of them still think it will be worth more. Read from source...

- The article contains inconsistencies, such as mentioning that EPS beat consensus estimates, while revenue missed the estimates.
- The article uses a biased source (Benzinga) to support its claims, which may not be reliable or objective.
- The article does not provide any analysis or reasoning for the price target changes, only stating the fact that they were cut.
- The article shows emotional behavior by using phrases like "fell 28.4%", "slashed", "downgraded", which imply a negative tone and judgment.
- The article does not provide any historical context or comparison to previous performance, which would help understand the significance of the results and guidance.

### Final answer: The article is not a high-quality source, as it contains inconsistencies, biases, and emotional language. It does not provide any in-depth analysis or reasoning for the price target changes. A better source would be one that provides more details, context, and analysis, and uses more objective and rational language.