Originally Posted by LC FP

"But the conclusion drawn..."

"the conclusion they derived..."

There is no conclusion section in this study. Only a discussion, in which they present their findings. You're left to draw your own conclusions. The media is quick to draw conclusions, and those who have an ax to grind. They refer to previous studies, both positive and negative, as a reason to do another (this) study.

Originally Posted by 2nd paragraph of Discussion section of the article

Our findings indicate that a comprehensive, customized, therapeutic strategy targeting glycated hemoglobin levels below 6.0% increased the rate of death from any cause after a mean of 3.5 years, as compared with a strategy targeting levels of 7.0 to 7.9% in patients with a median glycated hemoglobin level of 8.1% and either previous cardiovascular events or multiple cardiovascular risk factors.

Originally Posted by 'Conclusion' section of the abstract - printed with the article

Conclusions[:] As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes.