I am going to take this article with a grain of salt and see what they say next week, and then the week after. Just like the news of having a glass of wine is good for you. Then it was bad for you. Then good for you. then bad for you. It has flip flopped so many times over the last year that I forget which one it is now.
It depends on what part of which study they're reading. The red wine thing... The silica in red wine (white wine, beer, whiskey, vodka, rum, etc.) does have antioxidant properties, and that's a good thing, but it's still in liquid suspension with alcohol, which is not so good for you. How does that balance out? I have no idea, and neither does the news reader. The story gets dropped on their desk with whatever spin the reporter put on int, based on whatever spin their source put on it, based on whatever spin the study authors put on it, based on the one data point they were chasing when they did the study, while ignoring "irrelevant" data.
Enjoy your glass of wine, vape your tasty juice, and be glad you're not smoking, which is clearly worse, and that you have the self control to hold it to one glass of wine. If it takes a day or two of your life, will you know in the end which day you lost to the wine, which to the vape, and which to the year you spent working the night shift when you were 23, and just starting out? Will you know it from the day you lost because you lived in a big city, filled with exhaust fumes, or on a farm, breathing methane from cow farts? Will it matter to you? It won't matter to me, when my time comes.