What I meant was that for the average layperson that doesn't have much knowledge of this sort of thing can be misled to believe that therefore kava is harmful. That's all. The narrow scope of the study, as well as a vastly different methodology than our kava use means that it shouldn't be taken for anything more than specific research regarding perfusing kavain in rat liver.
I'm just trying to give the newbs and/or people without knowing how to interpret this data that kava is indeed, still proven to be non-toxic. Removing your liver, passing a very high amount of kavain through your vena cava then re-collecting it directly after exiting your portal vein, and then repeating that for 2hrs.
That doesn't take into account systemic blood flow, other sites of metabolism, and all sorts of common, important physiological functions. This sort of thing is too narrow, because of all these thing listed, to be applicable to us. For example, a better methodology for our purposes would be to study kavain orally through rats (like how we consume kava, unless there's people using it rectally or IP), use a control like they did, and maybe also test kavain in the presence of glutathione. Drug metabolism is far more complex than the study showed/used, not to mention the IMMENSE amount of factors that would have been needed to accurately determine hepatotoxicity of kava.
This is the only aim of study, as they themselves say: "The aim of this study was to investigate whether the major kavalactone, kavain, induces ultrastructural changes and function of the liver instead of biochemical perturbations." as well as "[...] additional investigations with other kavalactones and their effects on liver are urgently needed."
That is very, very narrow in scope in regards to applying it to our usage of kava. That's all I was saying. That being said, as long as one is able to interpret data like this, it is helpful for the medical community and indeed the kava community as a whole. There are many common herbs that are used in vast amounts for decades that don't have 1/10th of the research that kava does which is, IMO, one of kava's great advantages.
I should have been more clear about how/why I used the word misleading.