Actually when various peer reviewed studies contradict each other, and it does happen, it almost always means the effect they are studying is down there in the statistical noise -- and therefore not a significant threat either way.
As usual, your choice of words belies your deception. You know you are misrepresenting solid evidence, and even as an atheist you do have a shred of conscience left, so you hedge your statements using equivocal language to assuage your conscience.
The tobacco lawyers made statements like yours for decades. We are at the beginning of the same curve with abortion apologists. But Truth always prevails.