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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

851–860 of 1001 posts

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

#851

Post by lmm »

dahart wrote: post #827
dionidium wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, this is a good and fair pushback. But I’d respond that I chose secondhand smoke for a reason. I similarly doubt there’s any measurable impact of being around a smoker every once in a while, but the language around secondhand smoke got more and more hysterical leading up to the widespread implementation of smoking bans, to the point that it’s not uncommon today to hear people complain that walking near a…

With over a billion smokers on the planet, or ~20% of the population, it’s not that absurd to worry about urban smoke outdoors contributing to urban pollution. Nor wood burning house & backyard fires either, nor cars, but that’s a different debate… We aren’t around smokers once in a while, we’re around them constantly . Even urban outdoor second hand smoke really is a higher risk than air travel radiation. Yes I want…

> Even urban outdoor second hand smoke really is a higher risk than air travel radiation.

Isn't this exactly what's in dispute? What's the evidence that this is true?

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

#852

Post by bagacrap »

darod wrote: post #285
kstrauser wrote: post #159

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…

"it’s not a source of empty calories" Until you get the munchies...

tbf the munchy satisfying foods aren't necessarily empty calories. Alcohol is the worst of all macros and devoid of nutrition.

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

#853

Post by nimish »

f38zf5vdt wrote: post #379
nuclearnice1 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To point 1. In the brief I find at the red download link [1] contains the line “ Based on recent evidence, it has been concluded that there is “no safe level of alcohol consumption”(5).” The reference points to an article from The Lancet [2] [1] https://world-heart-federation.org/wp-content/uploads/WHF-Po... [2] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

Another article from The Lancet from around the same time reported a whopping... 6 months of life expectancy reduction when consuming 100-200g of alcohol a week versus 0-100g of alcohol a week. [1, Figure 4] A drink is 14 grams of alcohol, so that means that your risk from consuming 150 grams, or over 10 drinks a week, is still relatively low in terms of all-cause mortality. Figure 1 also shows that consumption of 0-…

You've uncovered the fundamental issue with numerous public health studies: the effect size is irrelevant.

You don't get attention for being modest.

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

#854

Post by lmm »

labster wrote: post #797
wolverine876 wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate impact is significant. That's going to interfere with generations enjoying their lives.

If you care about climate, get cryptocurrency banned. Air travel has all sorts of bad consequences, but also has economic and social benefits. Crypto on the other hand is an endless black hole of energy that even when used for its intended purpose creates economic and social harm. Talking about taking away things that people like, like airplanes and red meat and gas stoves just get people up in arms. Start with the l…

> Talking about taking away things that people like, like airplanes and red meat and gas stoves just get people up in arms. Start with the low-hanging fruit: crypto has no value except to speculators and criminals and tax evaders.

What distinction are you drawing here? Both flying and crypto have a handful of rabid fans who use them a lot (and seem to enjoy it) while most regular people barely think about them at all, except to get vaguely irritated when they hear them passing by.

(I'm in favour of punitively high taxes on both, FWIW)

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

#855

Post by lmm »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #377
allturtles wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I find the claim "no level of alcohol consumption is safe" hyperbolic. You could claim with far more justification that "no amount of driving is safe" since you could be killed pulling out of your driveway but I think most people who drive on a daily basis would find this claim odd. "safety" is a relative, not an absolute condition, since in some sense being alive is unsafe.

That is a weird comparison. No one is forcing you to drink alcohol, but you might be forced to drive to the office. One is avoidable, the other one is not. Or if you want to be even more precise: One is easily avoidable and the other might cost you your job.

Driving is absolutely avoidable. Being willing to drive might help you get a better job - but so might being willing to drink.

(Far more importantly, drinking is actually enjoyable, whereas commute-style driving is a chore. Considering a job to be somehow more important than a social occasion is putting the cart before the horse)

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

#856

Post by ausername42027 »

dionidium wrote: post #669
solox3 wrote: 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…

There is robust data that the risk of first-hand smoke is not a linear relationship between cancer (and other bad stuff) and dose--no amount of smoking is safe.

To be frank you are uninformed on basic statistics as well as medicine.

You are doing the standard thing that many educated people do when they think they are smarter and more informed than they are. You dress up a bad take as if you found some secret (CDC's hypocritical language) and assume that a mathematical relationship exists ("obviously exposure to bad stuff carries linear risk"), when it is actually more complex than that (if we can call a binary relationship more complex than linear lol).

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

#857

Post by [deleted] »

derefr wrote: post #824
dionidium wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, this is a good and fair pushback. But I’d respond that I chose secondhand smoke for a reason. I similarly doubt there’s any measurable impact of being around a smoker every once in a while, but the language around secondhand smoke got more and more hysterical leading up to the widespread implementation of smoking bans, to the point that it’s not uncommon today to hear people complain that walking near a…

> to hear people complain that walking near a smoker on a sidewalk outside is a risk to their health Doesn't have to be the smoke itself that's harmful. Presumably, if you can smell someone's second-hand smoke, you're also inhaling the bacterial spray contained in their breath, no? Something I think about if I'm walking outside without a mask on and end up stuck walking for a while behind a smoker. I tend to put my m…

[deleted]

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

#859

Post by robocat »

dahart wrote: post #827
dionidium wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, this is a good and fair pushback. But I’d respond that I chose secondhand smoke for a reason. I similarly doubt there’s any measurable impact of being around a smoker every once in a while, but the language around secondhand smoke got more and more hysterical leading up to the widespread implementation of smoking bans, to the point that it’s not uncommon today to hear people complain that walking near a…

With over a billion smokers on the planet, or ~20% of the population, it’s not that absurd to worry about urban smoke outdoors contributing to urban pollution. Nor wood burning house & backyard fires either, nor cars, but that’s a different debate… We aren’t around smokers once in a while, we’re around them constantly . Even urban outdoor second hand smoke really is a higher risk than air travel radiation. Yes I want…

I wish it were acceptable to complain about stinky purfumes and body sprays. They fill the air with volatile organic compounds. Plenty of people are happy to chuck on something smelly while hypocritically complaining about other types of smells. Some cause allergies (hayfever) in me to the point I have to leave an enclosed space or suffer consequences. I know friends that get headaches from them.

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

#860

Post by justatdotin »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #422
leonidasv wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

See, I'm of the opinion that problem drinking and/or weed is escapism or a form of self-harm, and unless the underlying issues are solved you'd just find an alternative. Anecdotal, but I drink less now that I'm in a comitted relationship / living together. I still drink, but it's social. I've only been sort of hung over once in the past year.

what's wrong with temporarily escaping sobriety?

Anecdotally, my partner and I enjoy sharing various intoxicants within a committed relationship.

I do not see an underlying issue to be solved.

Post reply on HN