Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

livescience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 101 posts

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#11

Post by raffael-vogler »

> The three leading causes of attributable deaths in this age group were tuberculosis (1·4% [95% UI 1·0–1·7] of total deaths), road injuries (1·2% [0·7–1·9]), and self-harm (1·1% [0·6–1·5]).

TBC is still an infectious disease and road injuries are preventable by simply not driving after having had a drink and self-harm is rather unlikely after a bottle of beer.

> and the level of consumption that minimises health loss is zero.

That is a triviality. Alcohol has no health benefits.

---

Seems to me that it is okay to have a drink a day.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#12

Post by commandlinefan »

refurb wrote: post #4
johnmoberg wrote: post #2

I 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.

Especially since your risk of death increases every time you get out of bed in the morning. Pass the vodka!

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#13

Post by thatsamonad »

frank_s wrote: post #7

One 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…

> people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis.

I cringe reading that as a child of parents who spent their lives self-medicating through drugs and alcohol rather than seeking outside help...

> How many lives has that saved?

I don’t know how many it’s saved, but I can tell you that it’s severely damaged and nearly ruined the lives of at least a handful of innocent bystanders.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#14

Post by lcfcjs2 »

robbick wrote: post #3

A 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…

Great comment. This is very true. People who drive cars are more likely to die from injuries than people who stay at home.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#15

Post by freehunter »

thatsamonad wrote: post #13
frank_s wrote: post #7

One 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…

> people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis. I cringe reading that as a child of parents who spent their lives self-medicating through drugs and alcohol rather than seeking outside help... > How many lives has that saved? I don’t know how many it’s saved, but I can tell you that it’s severely damaged and nearly ruined the lives of at least a handful of innocent bystanders.

There's a big difference between having a beer after a hard day at work and actual alcohol dependency. One is harmless (and possible harm-reducing), the other destroys lives and relationships.

We need to be able to differentiate between the two without conflating them.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#16

Post by hobs »

freehunter wrote: post #15
thatsamonad wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis. I cringe reading that as a child of parents who spent their lives self-medicating through drugs and alcohol rather than seeking outside help... > How many lives has that saved? I don’t know how many it’s saved, but I can tell you that it’s severely damaged and nearly ruined the lives of at least a handful of innocent bystanders.

There's a big difference between having a beer after a hard day at work and actual alcohol dependency. One is harmless (and possible harm-reducing), the other destroys lives and relationships. We need to be able to differentiate between the two without conflating them.

The GP clearly notes they are an alcoholic, so I wouldn't say the responder is conflating anything.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#17

Post by JoeAltmaier »

robbick wrote: post #3

A 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…

Fatuous remark by that professor. Drinking doesn't get you to work etc. Its entirely dispensable.

I read (here) that 10% of liquor stores' customers are half the volume. So the lesson probably applies mostly to those 10% who think "one drink a day" is a reasonable thing. The other 90% are risking very little, especially if they do their drinking at home.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#18

Post by finaliteration »

freehunter wrote: post #15
thatsamonad wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people can self-medicate themselves in times of crisis. I cringe reading that as a child of parents who spent their lives self-medicating through drugs and alcohol rather than seeking outside help... > How many lives has that saved? I don’t know how many it’s saved, but I can tell you that it’s severely damaged and nearly ruined the lives of at least a handful of innocent bystanders.

There's a big difference between having a beer after a hard day at work and actual alcohol dependency. One is harmless (and possible harm-reducing), the other destroys lives and relationships. We need to be able to differentiate between the two without conflating them.

> There's a big difference between having a beer after a hard day at work and actual alcohol dependency.

I’m not saying they’re the same thing and that having a beer ruins lives. I certainly have a glass of wine from time to time and don’t feel it’s having an impact on anyone around me. But, at least to me, “self-medicating” implies far more consumption than just one drink.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#19

Post by barking »

hobs wrote: post #16
freehunter wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a big difference between having a beer after a hard day at work and actual alcohol dependency. One is harmless (and possible harm-reducing), the other destroys lives and relationships. We need to be able to differentiate between the two without conflating them.

The GP clearly notes they are an alcoholic, so I wouldn't say the responder is conflating anything.

So what's an alcoholic? Seems to me that almost all drinkers are, seeing as how most of them find it nicer to keep drinking.

Re: There's No 'Safe' Level of Alcohol Consumption, Global Study Finds

#20

Post by baumgarn »

frank_s wrote: post #7

One 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…

If you suffer from anxiety, cut out all booze and caffeine, and start exercising.
Post reply on HN