As far as I know, death in undefeated.
If you think about it, even breathing is dangerous. Every single person who engages in that activity ends up dying…100% fatal!
Think I’ll ignore those sacrilegious scientists and follow 1 Timothy 5:23 “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities.” (St. Paul speaking to Timothy, his disciple)
All these health studies are driving me to drink!
Bruce
![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}
And those risks are much higher in the PacNW these days. You are better off drinking than breathing.
One of the issues I had with the study was that if I understood the results correctly, they were counting other issues such as suicide, drunk driving deaths, death and injury by accidents associated with alcohol, etc. as part of the consequences of alcohol. If we’re really going to go by those standards, EVERYTHING we do aside from imbibing alcohol is unsafe.
The other issue I have is the sensationalistic aspect these types of studies always promote in general which I feel only happens in our hypocritically puritanical North American society. Prescription opioids are bad for you. Recreational drugs like LSD and cocaine are bad for you. Yet funny how I never see a headline that reads “Study Says No Amount of Opiods Are Safe.” Then again, opioids aren’t associated with social behavior in general and sexual activity in particular the way alcohol is.
All I can tell you is that as someone who has been drinking wine and spirits moderately for the last 8 years I don’t feel any more or less unsafe in my life than I did during the decades before that I was a complete non-drinker. I’m pretty sure the moderation has something to do with it.
I’m warming up to the idea that the press is the enemy of the people.
Which press? Fox? NYT? It’s hardly homogeneous. And in any case this is the work of scientists. ‘The press’ are only the messengers.
Getting out of bed every day increases the risk of death. So does not getting out of bed.
The headlines on this research are highly misleading. 1 of 25,000 people on one drink per day for a year is not risky
In addition to the methodological issues with this particular study raised earlier in the thread, the above is a potential criticism of any large study. If you have enough subjects even a tiny difference between groups may become statistically significant. That doesn’t mean it is clinically significant. Nor does it mean it is relevant. Editors should require that authors put risks into perspective when the differences are so small. Is it greater than the risk of being killed in a car accident? A plane crash? Being hit by lightening? Killed by a stray bullet?
Yet another issue with large population studies is that results for the average member of the study population can’t be applied to an individual. Whether the results are in a tight or broad bell curve distribution or skewed, the mean result differs from the outcome to some degree for almost all individuals. So even if you think a 1 in 25,000 risk is important, you have no way of knowing whether your individual risk is higher or lower than that without considering your individual risk factors.
Statistician ? ![[thumbs-up.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/f/f84c5acc11486ee4baba6dee6cf61dbd133abb18.gif "[thumbs-up.gif]"){kind=small}
Here is a NY Times take on one of the more thought-provoking books I’ve read in a while.
Warning - Being born will result in you dying.
can someone better at math than me explain what this article is talking about here:
Let’s consider one drink a day (10g, 1.25 UK units) compared to none, for which the authors estimated an extra 4 (918–914) in 100,000 people would experience a (serious) alcohol-related condition.
That means, to experience one extra problem, 25,000 people need to drink 10g alcohol a day for a year, that’s 3,650g a year each.
To put this in perspective, a standard 70cl bottle of gin contains 224 g of alcohol, so 3,650g a year is equivalent to around 16 bottles of gin per person. That’s a total of 400,000 bottles of gin among 25,000 people, being associated with one extra health problem. Which indicates a rather low level of harm in these occasional drinkers.
Next look at 2 drinks a day, that’s 20g, or 2.5 units, slightly above the current UK guidelines of 14 units a week for both men and women.
In this case, compared to non-drinkers an extra 63 (977–914) in 100,000 people experience a health problem each year. That means, to experience one extra problem, 1,600 people need to drink 20g alcohol a day for a year, in which case we would expect 16 instead of 15 problems between them. That’s 7.3 kg a year each, equivalent to around 32 bottles of gin per person. So a total of 50,000 bottles of gin among these 1,600 people is associated with one extra health problem. Which still indicates a very low level of harm in drinkers drinking just more than the UK guidelines.
ive been confused since the study was released if they are looking at data points from thousands of individuals, or from country populations as a whole, and averaging the drinking of a whole population amount all its people. mostly because the analysis of the original study seemed to jump through a lot of hoops to arrive at the data they wanted (from my admittedly untrained-in-statistics mind). the quoted analysis seems to also be looking at averaged drinks and not at people as groups. does the increased mortality of those drinking 5 drinks/day not pull all of the data up significantly?
Physician, but I review papers for a number of journals.
A physician with statistical “chops”. Bravo!
What’s the difference between “The Press” and “Science”?
If you don’t know that answer then any explanation will be beyond your comprehension.
Strange comment.
I think its difficult to generalize as it often is. Every body is different. How can someone explain that some people don’t get liver problems when drinking 1 liter wine per day for 30 years while someone else is deadly ill? So many other factors play a role. The gens, the entire lifestyle, sport or no sports, intake of medicine etc. Furthermore: Its doubtful if one should try to get as old as possible. I know quite a few very old people who complain most of the time about their ever growing frailty.
If you are a wine drinker I think its wise to have a health check every year. And btw: Life is way more than risks. The best advice I know is enjoying life without too much exaggerations. Most people have an inner voice when something is getting out of control. To hear this voice and change things if necessary is the best you can do. If you ignore this voice the doctor can’t help.