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

No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

who.int

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 385 posts

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#131

Post by paiute »

arsome wrote: post #76
paiute wrote: post #15

The thinking is backwards on this. They state there is no scientific safe drinking level. They even compare it to radiation. The goal is to establish an unsafe level. it's like saying there is no safe speed to drive a car - sure that's technically true, but worthless to say.

The goal here is to dispel the "extends health" and similar claims often made about light or moderate drinking. If you take a look at the studies you can determine how much of an increased risk you're comfortable with. For example, figure 5 in https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... When doing this analysis though be sure to note that scientists studying this use 10g drinks, which is 12.5mL of…

I might be wrong here, but I have never heard the claim that 2 beers might be good for your health. I have heard that with wine, but that's not a claim that alcohol is good for your health.

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#132

Post by xxs »

6d6b73 wrote: post #13
coldtea wrote: post #3

There's also a limit between a healthy lifestyle and enjoyment of life, beyond which towards "maximum health" you'll either go to an early grave because of how bland your life is, or live a joyless life avoiding things you'd enjoy. In any case, those kind of "research" is for modern americans (and people taking their cues from anglosaxon culture) , who are already conditioned in such hysteria - which is funny in the…

[flagged]

That's so dishonest; c'mon man - there are millions (likely billions) of people who enjoy a drink, I am rather confident you have absolutely no sorry given for the extreme vast majority, nor it bothers you.

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#133

Post by Bud »

BobbyJo wrote: post #55
sh4rks wrote: post #21

> However, latest available data indicate that half of all alcohol-attributable cancers in the WHO European Region are caused by “light” and “moderate” alcohol consumption – less than 1.5 litres of wine or less than 3.5 litres of beer or less than 450 millilitres of spirits per week Half a litre of beer a day is considered "light"?

Beer in the EU is often ~4% alcohol. Half a liter is barely more than a can of Coors light in terms of alcohol volume.

[dead]

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#135

Post by yokem55 »

VLM wrote: post #70
konschubert wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment adds nothing to the discussion.

The world is full of people who strongly and honestly believe anecdotes are more important than statistics and statistics are meaninglessly astrological in nature. Its a very popular set of beliefs, majority in some areas.

The problem is that how well anyone's particular life circumstances fit into a statistical model (or not) can be a very difficult thing to discern. There is a combinatorial explosion of factors that everyone is subject to, and most epidemiological statistics can address and account for a handful of them at a time. So what ends up happening is folks look at the statistics, shrug, and continue their own n=1. The best they can do is be honest with themselves about "how is that working out for you?"

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#136

Post by misiti3780 »

simple-thoughts wrote: post #126

Fruit juice also contains small amounts of ethanol, so if the WHO is correct then do not replace your wine with fruit juice. Or as is more likely, this is completely overblown just as the anti tobacco campaign has been overblown. Yes alcohol and tobacco aren’t good for you, no they are not imbued with magic properties where even 1 drop means cancer. This type of thinking is common in pre scientific communities, where…

I mean, the WHO has such an amazing track record at this point, did everyone forget about their COVID failures:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-57085505

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#137

Post by andsoitis »

bamboozled wrote: post #20
joemazerino wrote: post #11

I despise the WHO generally but this article is solid. There is too much confusion about alcohol in the medical industry. If you ask European doctors having a glass or two of wine "extends health". If you research typical government guidelines, they say a drink or two a day isn't bad or may even say it's "healthy" [1] The facts are facts. Alcohol is a poison that wrecks havoc on your mind and body. If having one drin…

Anecdotally I know a lot of really old people who still drink. Maybe I'd know more if they didn't drink. I know one guy who is ~90, survived cancer 3 times and attributes his survival to daily doses of Japanese Shochu. You might be able to argue that alcohol was the cause of the cancer but I guess we'll never know. Disclaimer: Currently not drinking even a drop. Edit: Maybe I'd know more if they didn't drink. ...is a…

don’t let anecdata bamboozle you

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#138

Post by zabzonk »

marcosdumay wrote: post #87
rco8786 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s basically 1 pint a day, or 16 oz as the ceiling for “light”. That seems reasonable? Not the amount necessarily just the classification.

If you drink the average every day, you will spend a large part of your days inebriated. And if you don't drink the average every day, you will be deeply drunk every few days. It's completely unreasonable to call that level of consumption "light".

what on earth do you mean by inebriated?

i'd really like to know where all of these people that can't seem to handle a glass of beer, quite probably with something to eat, without freaking out are coming from?

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#139

Post by rs999gti »

6d6b73 wrote: post #13
coldtea wrote: post #3

There's also a limit between a healthy lifestyle and enjoyment of life, beyond which towards "maximum health" you'll either go to an early grave because of how bland your life is, or live a joyless life avoiding things you'd enjoy. In any case, those kind of "research" is for modern americans (and people taking their cues from anglosaxon culture) , who are already conditioned in such hysteria - which is funny in the…

[flagged]

> I'm sorry for you.

We don't think about you at all

Re: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health

#140

Post by lstodd »

kitten_mittens_ wrote: post #52
lr4444lr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving isn't hazardous to your health. Crashing is. That's like saying eating is unhealthy to your health because you might choke.

Driving is hazardous to other people's health in the form of crashes AND pollution in the form of noise, dust, and exhaust.

It is also beneficial because various crap gets delivered, people move fast to where they are needed and generally stuff gets done. Some paramedics even get so brazen as to fly helicopters to the rescue.

How do you draw the line?

Post reply on HN