Personally I would trust readers to click on the article and decide for themselves. Otherwise, it's a bit infantilizing, no?
This is already contrary to all available evidence.
You mean a blog that loosely cites two papers of unknown quality and draws novel conclusions not from the papers?
Yes, it absolutely should not be stated as fact.
Articles summarizing studies as described should use language accordingly. Otherwise you risk certainty-addicts swarming and shouting down reasonable circumspection.
How many people have skimmed the the headlines and had this assertion register semi-consciously as a fact, whether or not they even looked at the article or comments.
Misinformation noise.