it's the article that is stupid, not the study. the study is actually believable - because it upholds the idea of risk from constant exposure.

the same thing is true of second-hand smoke, for example. you're probably not going to get cancer from sitting in a smoky room a few times a year. but, if you sit in a smoky room every single day for an extended period, then you actually have a very high risk of developing cancer from exposure to other people's smoke.

and, that is both why the stipulation that they studied daily use makes the study very believable and the headline very stupid, as daily use is not at all the same thing as casual use.

the headline should say "no amount of habitual use is safe". which is kind of like saying "there's no such thing as a moderate alcoholic".

if, like me, you have a drink once in a while, or even a few once in a while, you're not in the category that is being studied, here.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4406827/no-amount-of-alcohol-safe-study/?utm_source=Other&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014