*Edit: I really appreciate everyone's comments and questions, but I'd like to encourage you to direct them to a qualified professional. Even with a degree under my belt, I'm just a guy, and I don't want anyone basing their decisions on anything I might seem to have suggested. If you decide one thing from all of this, it's that you should talk to a dietitian about whatever questions you have, and use them as your main resource for reliable nutrition information. It's what they're trained for, and believe me, they worked hard to get there.*
They keep hitting this "alcohol is good/bad" ball back and forth, it's gotta be confusing to a lot of people. I'm inclined to believe that people shouldn't be drinking with the aim of harnessing any potential health benefits, and instead should just understand that, for most people, the occasional drink isn't necessarily going to do them much *harm.* It seems like a lot of people use the "daily drinking is healthy, right??" excuse to indulge more than might be wise for them. Either way, it's too early for giving sweeping recommendations like that, in either direction.
Honestly, as an Applied Human Nutrition grad, this is one of the more frustrating things that both nutrition professionals and people in general have to deal with. There are just far too many generalized statements about things which, I think, don't take into account individual factors. When you're dealing with something as regular and lifelong as, well, *eating*, those differences can pile up over time, leading to vastly varied outcomes. This can lead to a lot of inconclusive science for nutrition professionals to try to sort through, and a lot of misunderstood information for everyone else. Just taking into account differences in activity level and lifestyle, saying that "X is good, Y is bad," is often misleading. "Good" or "bad" *for whom* is often either not stated or conclusively definable in the research, not specified--or contexualized--in the reporting, or is totally misunderstood by the layman. As a result, we get people treating population-subset-specific findings as if they can be generalized across an entire population. It just leads to so much confusion and contradiction in the general discourse. This is why people need dietitians more than they appreciate, to navigate this labyrinth of information. (And I say this as someone who, degree notwithstanding, currently has no plans to become one.)
With all that going on, it's no wonder so many people can't take Nutrition seriously as a science.
The NHMRC of Australia has already done away with the sex difference of alcohol consumption. It's a solid no more than two standard drinks a day, no more than four on any one occasion, and ideally none when pregnant or breastfeeding. This is all regardless of sex.
Edit: updated some words.
I thought that US guideline had to do with body weight differences, and less on gender, being that women on average are smaller than men. Meaning that for the average citizen the guideline is a good guide.
Edit: More about intoxication and less longterm health.
So there is a comparison of life expectancy between those that drink less than 100 grams per week, between 100 and 200, between 200 and 350, and more than 350. What about the life expectancy of total abstainers? The headline claims that the study found no overall health benefits from moderate drinking, but the article at least doesn't even address the outcome differences between moderate drinkers and total abstainers.
When I have tried to find studies on this issue in the past every study I have found saw a higher life expectancy in moderate drinkers than total abstainers even when controlling for past alcohol use, gender, income, etc.
edit: Thank you to OP for posting the study. "Our aim was to characterise risk thresholds for all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease subtypes **in current drinkers of alcohol**." This study didn't even look at drinking versus non-drinking. The first claim in the headline is not supported by the study, it is not something that the study looked at.