Live data from Hacker News

No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

bloomberg.com

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to feel some dissonance about this, you might note that this is the exact language the CDC uses for things like secondhand smoke -- "There is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke" -- which everybody nods along to and accepts without much scrutiny. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/seco... Meanwhile, when it's something like, say, cosmic radiation exposure from c…

The CDC has been unfortunately hopelessly politicized. It happened long before the pandemic. OTOH, I would make the differentiating point that air travel has positive benefits to society and costs and one has to weigh those against each other. You can’t make the blanket statement “earth would be better off if air travel went away completely.” It’s hard to find any benefit to smoking, first hand or second, so it’s eas…

> It’s hard to find any benefit to smoking, first hand or second.

The same is true about recreational travel. People expose themselves to high levels of radiation and travel risk purely for recreational purposes. Smokers inhale carcinogenic substances for recreational purposes.

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#713

Although I live in a place where weed is legal, I don’t use it. I enjoy the occasional glass of a nice scotch, though, and I love a good stout or porter beer. This is where it gets a little strange for me: by every metric I can think of, I’d be better off replacing alcohol with weed. There seem to be fewer negative effects, it’s not a source of empty calories, and looks like a better recreational drug in every way. A…

I once fell into the trap of thinking that, this sticky green leaf was just a fun harmless substance. It's a silent killer,compared to alcohol it's so easily abusable because you can never have too much. What was half a roll after a long day of work became 2 or 3 rolls a day. It makes you okay with being mediocre, and comes with a lot of sneaky short and long term mental side effects that are yet to be studied. Latel…

> Lately I would rather have a scotch and 24 hour later have it out of my system, than live with a thin daily mental fog.

This was absolutely my experience and resulting opinion as well. Ultimately weed is not as harsh in the short term for me, but the cumulative effects over even a week of usage start to become apparent in my cognitive ability. It's a little insidious the way it creeps up on me. For that reason I don't partake nearly as often and have fallen back to enjoying alcohol in moderation myself.

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#714
post #202

I am fine with abstinence as a general recommendation, but critical thinking pointed out two issues with the WHF Policy Brief, which I suppose I have read in sufficient depth: 1. There is no citation on the sentence, "Recent evidence has found that no level of alcohol consumption is safe for health." This is really the only line we are interested in. 2. There is no comparison on the effects of alcohol on the body by…

If you want to feel some dissonance about this, you might note that this is the exact language the CDC uses for things like secondhand smoke -- "There is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke" -- which everybody nods along to and accepts without much scrutiny. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/seco... Meanwhile, when it's something like, say, cosmic radiation exposure from c…

I can choose to take a flight or consume alcohol, but I can’t choose to not breathe while you smoke next to me. There is no need to look for conspiracy theories as homework.

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#715

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to feel some dissonance about this, you might note that this is the exact language the CDC uses for things like secondhand smoke -- "There is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke" -- which everybody nods along to and accepts without much scrutiny. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/seco... Meanwhile, when it's something like, say, cosmic radiation exposure from c…

The CDC has been unfortunately hopelessly politicized. It happened long before the pandemic. OTOH, I would make the differentiating point that air travel has positive benefits to society and costs and one has to weigh those against each other. You can’t make the blanket statement “earth would be better off if air travel went away completely.” It’s hard to find any benefit to smoking, first hand or second, so it’s eas…

benefit of smoking is the buzz and social enhancement. it is not useless.

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#716
post #202

I am fine with abstinence as a general recommendation, but critical thinking pointed out two issues with the WHF Policy Brief, which I suppose I have read in sufficient depth: 1. There is no citation on the sentence, "Recent evidence has found that no level of alcohol consumption is safe for health." This is really the only line we are interested in. 2. There is no comparison on the effects of alcohol on the body by…

If you want to feel some dissonance about this, you might note that this is the exact language the CDC uses for things like secondhand smoke -- "There is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke" -- which everybody nods along to and accepts without much scrutiny. Source: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/seco... Meanwhile, when it's something like, say, cosmic radiation exposure from c…

Good points. If I can take a crack at the exercise for the reader, I think the inconsistency has fairly straight forward reasons, even if they're frustrating: humans are terrible at reasoned risk analysis (if they even see the value); people prefer absolutes and easy heuristics to "it depends"; most people have first-hand experience with the extremes of smoking and drinking and it's thus easy to vilify; the best defense of vice is pleasure, which isn't much of a defense in the eyes of many, whereas exposure to pollution and cosmic rays is impossible to prevent without giving up near-universally valued things (transportation, energy).

We see similar patterns with nuclear power, climate change, and pandemics...

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#717
post #711

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CDC has been unfortunately hopelessly politicized. It happened long before the pandemic. OTOH, I would make the differentiating point that air travel has positive benefits to society and costs and one has to weigh those against each other. You can’t make the blanket statement “earth would be better off if air travel went away completely.” It’s hard to find any benefit to smoking, first hand or second, so it’s eas…

> It’s hard to find any benefit to smoking, first hand or second. The same is true about recreational travel. People expose themselves to high levels of radiation and travel risk purely for recreational purposes. Smokers inhale carcinogenic substances for recreational purposes.

Is the risk for the two even remotely in the same ballpark?

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#718

>Studies have shown that even small amounts of alcohol can increase a person’s risk of cardiovascular disease I've never drunk alcohol before. Is it worth never having it? Does one drink really ruin your body that much.

Disclaimer, not a scientist, just a (3 year) sober alcoholic One drink once in your life is not going to harm you. I think this is talking more about the "moderate" drinking of 1-2 servings per week. That said, I've been down the whole alcohol path before and it ain't good for me. I don't know of any time since I've gotten sober that I thought back and said "Man, I wish I had been drunk for that" It's an unnecessary…

My parents and grandparents drinks wine daily… every single meal (no water at their table)… have done their entire life… grandpa died at 94 due to an accident… grandma 98 and going strong… both my parents are 75 healthy and a active (always around travelling). But for them alcohol is not a drug… is a beverage that goes very well with food! They never drink for the sake of it! As long as a person sees alcohol as a recreational drug he has a problem but it must not always be the case!

P.S. we are from Southern Europe

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#719

Although I live in a place where weed is legal, I don’t use it. I enjoy the occasional glass of a nice scotch, though, and I love a good stout or porter beer. This is where it gets a little strange for me: by every metric I can think of, I’d be better off replacing alcohol with weed. There seem to be fewer negative effects, it’s not a source of empty calories, and looks like a better recreational drug in every way. A…

Well, media has been recently overwhelmed by studies showcasing the benefits of weed so that the disadvantages of using it appear to be lower or none at all, but that's not really the case. If smoked, you're smoking tar and volatile compounds that can harm the lungs, much like a regular cigarette - although you're probably not going to smoke a pack of 20 joints in a single day like the moderate-to-heavy smoker next d…

[deleted]

Re: No amount of alcohol is good for the heart, says World Heart Federation

#720

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mind is part of the body Also contrary to popular belief, alcohol does not heal or help the mind unless perhaps you have methanol poisoning or are in the middle of a panic attack

> alcohol does not heal or help the mind Is it not possible that some people find alcohol in reasonable doses to be a net positive mentally and mood-wise?

People are notoriously bad at observing/examining their own behavior and mental states, although it is possible. But those people would probably be better served with a pharmacological anxiety treatment or therapy
Post reply on HN