An incorrect interpretation, sure, but not one you have to be dumb to make.
In this case Facebook appear to have simply ticked every possible box for data collection regardless of whether the app actually does it or not. Note you can't just get health data on iOS without asking, so people would notice if they tried. My guess is that actually figuring out what they do/don't collect was too hard, so they just said yes to everything.
Seriously I could barely even find the claim you speak of, when every other sentence is punctuated by a half-screen advertisement.
Why accept the claims of such obvious click-bait without evidence? There's no reason to believe anything said in the article, particularly when it's claims can easily be checked and shown to be false.
This is data that is linked to you, and the spamminess of the ads on qz.com is likely doing far more invasion of people's privacy than Threads could even dream of.
This comment thread was about Threads taking health data "from your phone," Which is does not do, and which that sceeenshot does not say it does.
This sort of data linking is absolutely pervasive in the web advertising industry, and it is bad. But let's not falsely say it's coming from the store of data on your phone, it's coming from advertising networks like those that pay for qz.com's hosting bills and profits.
This information is provided by the app developer; in this case Meta are telling Apple they use your health data and Apple is merely showing that information in the App Store.
How so? There is no hidden meaning here; Facebook are simply telling Apple that they will access your health information, and Apple is passing that information along. There’s no misinterpretation. The fact that the app doesn’t currently request this information is immaterial – Facebook are saying they will. The straightforward interpretation of the privacy card is the correct one.