Actually, I think Rrrrrachel is correct, but not in the way she means.
Yes, "most people would find that headline a reasonable representation of the study," because most people would not bother to actually read the study.
Not even doctors read these studies. They don't have time. They read the headlines, the snippets (carefully) selected (i.e., cherry-picked) for them in their newsletters from the pharmaceutical industry, and from the pharma-funded continuing medical education journals. It's very rare for them to even read the abstracts, because they simply don't have time.
If I didn't know better, from my years of research, and from my having actually READ the study, I would have thought it was a reasonable representation of the study, too.
Thankfully, I bothered to read it, and I can see just how many lies are contained in that headline. No matter what most people think.
There have been an awful lot of issues in history that "most people" found perfectly reasonable--until enough people fought back. Luckily, enough of us are starting to fight back to counteract that destructive philosophy.