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

201–210 of 385 posts

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

#201

Post by thebigspacefuck »

rco8786 wrote: post #39
bamboozled wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

For every of those is several people who died at 60 from liver disease

It’s happening to a lot of younger adults in their 30s now too.

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

#202

Post by kevinmchugh »

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…

The thing they have in common is that they still have social connections, including with you. People who are alone for stretches of time have a lot more risk from falls, etc

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

#204

Post by arlort »

zabzonk wrote: post #43
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"?

it is where i come from - uk. also they don't say how many of those cancers can actually be attributed directly to alcohol consumption. my guess would be few.

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S1470-2045(21)00279-5/full...

> Globally, an estimated 741 300 (95% UI 558 500–951 200), or 4·1% (3·1–5·3), of all new cases of cancer in 2020 were attributable to alcohol consumption

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

#205

Post by RhysabOweyn »

barbazoo wrote: post #125

So much denialism going on here, it's like talking to my alcoholic relative. This shouldn't trigger such a strong reaction, if it does, one should look into why that is.

Maybe read the well documented history of self-righteous teetotalers? It's not too hard to understand what the goal of this type of rhetoric is.

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

#206

Post by [deleted] »

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".

[deleted]

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

#207

Post by P_I_Staker »

makeitdouble wrote: post #178

> To identify a “safe” level of alcohol consumption, valid scientific evidence would need to demonstrate that at and below a certain level, there is no risk of illness or injury associated with alcohol consumption. The premise of this “no level of consumption is safe” is this requirement to prove 0 risk. If for instance drinking one glass everyday increases your cancer chances by 0.0000000001%, bringing it to 0. 0000…

Should we be establishing safe amounts of cigarette smoking? Safe amounts of gasoline to drink?

Alcohol users really don't like people pointing out that their habit isn't safe.

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

#208

Post by cramjabsyn »

Doing dry jan this year helped to change my perspective on alcohol. My current outlook is that its fine outside the house as an enjoyable social thing, but drinking at home isn’t worth it. I’m sure that view will change over the years.

There are so many things in life which no level is safe, exhaust fumes, microplastic exposure, radiation, the passage of time, the key to all of course is moderation and time between exposures. except that last one

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

#210

Post by jowsie »

phonescreen_man wrote: post #88
fredley wrote: post #6

This is not news, it has been known for some time. For anyone wanting to get an in-depth, balanced, and rigorous take on alcohol I can heartily recommend Drink? by David Nutt. Reading it has made me more mindful of when and why I choose to drink, and increasingly I find myself drinking less and less.

Was David Nutt the UK scientific advisor who came out and said weed, lsd, ecstasy are all far less harmful than tobacco and alcohol and was then publicly shamed and abused by the uk Media for daring to suggest such a thing?

He compared taking ecstasy to riding a horse in terms of danger. It's one of many things that led to him being sacked.
Post reply on HN