Not my field, but the site on which it is published and the methodology for obtaining what they call “peer review” seems a little, um, unorthodox. I’ll wait for the JAMA or NE Journal study
Yes it probably does minimally increase the risk of cancer but may have benefits for cv health. Most of the cancer risk is associated with heavy use (hcc, esophageal scc)
It’s not that the study is wrong, it’s that what they contribute is hardly anything more than a little simple arithmetic. Basically, they are just converting the units of how we assess alcohol’s cancer risk into units of cigarette cancer risk. It wouldn’t make it into NEJM because journals of that caliber publish studies that actually make us change/reconsider how we think about the fields of medicine/biomedical science
After 2 or 3 glasses of wine, your spouse probably thinks your twice as good looking than you really are, and vise versa.
What’s life without a little slightly risky behavior…
Do you know what the cancer risk of smoking ten cigarettes a week is? No. Nor do the authors of the study. They say that ‘the risk of smoking approximately five cigarettes per day (35 cigarettes per week), [is] generally the lowest level of risk detailed in [epidemiological] studies’. This is true, and although there is a study that estimates the cancer risk of smoking very few cigarettes, albeit in a low quality journal, the authors ignore it and choose instead to extrapolate from other data. To put it in plain English, they had a guess.
It’s not the wine that gives you cancer. It’s the noise produced by the cork popping.
We should submit an NIH grant to study the risk in sommeliers vs. the general population.