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

31–40 of 101 posts

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

#31

Post by lmm »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #17
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.

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

WTF? Work exists to support a fun life, not the other way around.

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

#32

Post by barking »

finaliteration wrote: post #25
barking wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If we shouldn’t conflate having a single drink with alcohol-dependency then we also shouldn’t conflate the occasional drinker with those who are struggling with alcohol-dependency.

When I started smoking I used to smoke other people's cigarettes. Then I started buying my own out of embarrassment. I wasn't a tobacco addict in my own mind at that stage, I just like smoking. It was only when I wanted to quit I found it really hard to stay off for long periods. Eventually I managed it. The level I smoked at was about 10-15 a day. I know a man who smokes 60 a day. He is probably more addicted than I was but it's a matter of degree rather than me being able to look down on him as an addict as compared to my moderate level of smoking.

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

#33

Post by kartan »

I would like that people saw this as a reality check to another promoted narrative.

"Sometimes, beer loves us back too: Studies have suggested that, when consumed in moderation, beer has many health benefits." - http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/01/15/healthy-beer-drinkin...

"Despite the health benefits of moderate drinking, Holahan emphasizes the need for common sense. One or two drinks a day may be beneficial for some, but drinking a lot more can be dangerous, he said." - https://news.utexas.edu/2010/08/27/psychology_drinking

One in Five Americans Say Moderate Drinking Is Healthy - https://news.gallup.com/poll/184382/one-five-americans-say-m...

So there is still people believing that alcohol may be healthy. It is good to understand that it is not. And that to decide to drink will have consequences.

I have seen an increase of availability of alcohol-free drinks for the past decade that allow you to hang out with your friends, keeping that very needed human contact, but allowing you to not suffer the adverse effects of alcohol and to drive safe home.

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

#34

Post by mattnewport »

Having stopped drinking a bit over a year ago I'm curious if I'll actually recover from some of the damaging health effects or just not get any worse. I recall reading that for smoking your chance of dying returns to normal about 10 years after quitting but I'm not sure if there is similar research for drinking

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

#35

Post by IshKebab »

QasimK wrote: post #29
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…

Drinking and (often, necessary) driving are not comparable, so the commenter could have chosen a better comparison. Edit: Based on comments in this thread, there are a lot of different perspectives on how comparable these two activities are. I still think there are many significantly "better" examples that could have been given.

They are comparable. They're both activities that come with some risk of death, and both activities that we would like to be able to do.

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

#36

Post by IshKebab »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #17
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.

Driving may be less dispensable than drinking but it's not like you have to drive, and it's also not like there is no benefit to drinking.

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

#37

Post by FabHK »

kartan wrote: post #33

I would like that people saw this as a reality check to another promoted narrative. "Sometimes, beer loves us back too: Studies have suggested that, when consumed in moderation, beer has many health benefits." - http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/01/15/healthy-beer-drinkin... "Despite the health benefits of moderate drinking, Holahan emphasizes the need for common sense. One or two drinks a day may be beneficial for s…

Just want to point out that in many countries public transport is such that to „drive safe home“ is not a consideration.

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

#38

Post by nightski »

IshKebab wrote: post #35
QasimK wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drinking and (often, necessary) driving are not comparable, so the commenter could have chosen a better comparison. Edit: Based on comments in this thread, there are a lot of different perspectives on how comparable these two activities are. I still think there are many significantly "better" examples that could have been given.

They are comparable. They're both activities that come with some risk of death, and both activities that we would like to be able to do.

Many drive because it's required to get to their job and survive economically. I'm not sure the same case could be made for alcohol.

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

#40

Post by mattnewport »

marak830 wrote: post #10
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…

"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 :-)

It's a vaguely amusing line but it doesn't actually make any sense in context.
Post reply on HN