There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
1–10 of 101 posts
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#2I think it's clear that alcohol consumption is a burden on society, but I think the headline exaggerates matters a bit. The relative risk is only 0.5% greater at one standard drink per day, relative to no alcohol consumption (see figure 5 in the paper.)
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#3A brilliant excerpt from the end of the bbc article[0]:
Yet Prof David Spiegelhalter, Winton Professor for the Public Understanding of Risk at the University of Cambridge, sounded a note of caution about the findings.
"Given the pleasure presumably associated with moderate drinking, claiming there is no 'safe' level does not seem an argument for abstention," he said.
"There is no safe level of driving, but the government does not recommend that people avoid driving.
"Come to think of it, there is no safe level of living, but nobody would recommend abstention."
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#4I think it's clear that alcohol consumption is a burden on society, but I think the headline exaggerates matters a bit. The relative risk is only 0.5% greater at one standard drink per day, relative to no alcohol consumption (see figure 5 in the paper.)
Articles like this tend to leave it at “your risk of death increases” without providing any sense as to what the magnitude of the increase is - without that its impossible to just the benefit-risk tradeoff.
A major pet peeve of mine.
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#5I haven't read the study, but going by the reporting, they are conflating different statistics, those of the direct health impact of alcohol, and those of the 'behavioral' impact (which may then have health effects).
No doubt there is an increased risk of death, due to alcohol, through drunk-driving (either as perp or victim), street violence and so on.
But many of those problems stem from a small percentage of people, or the small percentage of occasions, when it is consumed in excess.
I think what people want to know are the direct health risks of alcohol, in various amounts.
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#6I haven't read the study, but going by the reporting, they are conflating different statistics, those of the direct health impact of alcohol, and those of the 'behavioral' impact (which may then have health effects). No doubt there is an increased risk of death, due to alcohol, through drunk-driving (either as perp or victim), street violence and so on. But many of those problems stem from a small percentage of peopl…
Those are health risks of alcohol. People need to know all cause mortality.
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#7One of the good points about alcohol (there aren't many):
It is a strong anxiolytic and is readily available 'over the counter' which means people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis.
How many lives has that saved?
Most medical studies tell you significantly more about the prejudices of the authors and/or who paid for the study. This one seems no different in that regard.
I have an interest in the matter being an alcoholic myself.
A more interesting study would be on the degree of contempt we're held in by the medical profession at large.
RIP. Ian Murdock.
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#8I haven't read the study, but going by the reporting, they are conflating different statistics, those of the direct health impact of alcohol, and those of the 'behavioral' impact (which may then have health effects). No doubt there is an increased risk of death, due to alcohol, through drunk-driving (either as perp or victim), street violence and so on. But many of those problems stem from a small percentage of peopl…
Those are health risks of alcohol. People need to know all cause mortality.
It is an interesting statistic for the whole of society, but most individuals want to know the direct health impact of alcohol separate from the all-cause impact.
The headline is misleading - it should say 'there is no safe level of alcohol for the good of society' or something similar.
And it is even wrong - if it was possible to limit how much anyone could consume in a day, many of the 'behavioral' risks would go away, and we'd be left with the health risks only.
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#9One of the good points about alcohol (there aren't many): It is a strong anxiolytic and is readily available 'over the counter' which means people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis. How many lives has that saved? Most medical studies tell you significantly more about the prejudices of the authors and/or who paid for the study. This one seems no different in that regard. I have an interest in the matter…
What's the risk of anxiety if not medicated in a time of crisis? Tetsubo cardiomyopathy? A lost night of sleep? Personally I haven't drank in years and have managed my anxiety just fine through other means.
It's also a depressant and can make you feel worse. Some of the worst anxiety I've had is after a night of drinking. There's nothing like waking up in a pool of your own vomit after drinking alone and having every regrettable action before you blacked out come back to you from the night before. Thankfully I sleep on my side, but how many lives has that taken?
Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds
#10A brilliant excerpt from the end of the bbc article[0]: Yet Prof David Spiegelhalter, Winton Professor for the Public Understanding of Risk at the University of Cambridge, sounded a note of caution about the findings. "Given the pleasure presumably associated with moderate drinking, claiming there is no 'safe' level does not seem an argument for abstention," he said. "There is no safe level of driving, but the govern…
"Come to think of it, there is no safe level of living, but nobody would recommend abstention."
I think I have found my new motto :-)