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

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

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 190 posts

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

#81

Post by valenterry »

ahofmann wrote: post #34

I understand that the statement "only no alcohol is really safe" is correct. But it is not helpful in my everyday life. Exactly the same problem exists with gasoline. It is simply not possible (or extremely costly) to completely avoid the substance or their effects. To refuse a beer in Germany is an affront that I would like to weigh against the risk of cancer. In fact, I have found information on the question: The d…

> To refuse a beer in Germany is an affront that I would like to weigh against the risk of cancer.

Really? I'm from Germany and I don't think that's the case in most places. In the worst case, just say "sorry, my doctor said I can't drink alcohol for a while - you've got one without alc, pal?" and you should be good.

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

#82

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

shanebellone wrote: post #62
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> refuse a beer in Germany is an affront that I would like to weigh against the risk of cancer Refusing a cigarette used to have a similar insult; and also you weren’t cool if you refused That’s changed after decades of press and cancer warning labels on tobacco. Let’s hope the same happens with alcohol.

"Let’s hope the same happens with alcohol." Why? You have all the required information to make an educated decision for yourself. Others do too. Allow them to decide without harassment. I quit smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol years ago now. As the calculus changed, my habits followed suit. Everyone should be allowed to choose how they live.

I didn’t say outlaw it. Cigarettes are not outlawed. Let’s change the peer pressure around drinking like we did with cigarettes

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

#84

Post by scotty79 »

raverbashing wrote: post #67
stephen_g wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is the Lancet article summarising the research: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2... The proportion of cancers attributable to alcohol is 4.1% of all cases, from [1]. Of that, the ‘Light to Moderate’ alcohol category ( 1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2...

Yeah calling 1.5L/w 'light moderate' it's a stretch But anyway, I always take such research with a grain of salt (or maybe with a glass of wine) because alcohol consumption has personal relationship benefits Also not discounting the possibility that it's another "fat is bad" craze

Then again it's equivalent of 3.5 liters of beer per week. And you don't see people who drink one beer after work and at most two on weekend calling themselves heavy drinkers.

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

#85

Post by refurb »

This needs a true cost-benefit analysis. Thats what we do for any type of medical intervention. Some surgeries are super risky and some drugs have severe side effects that can kill you. Still, the overall benefit is positive.

Benefits: reduced stress, increased social interactions, improved mood

Costs: reduced lifespan, liver issues, addiction

I’ll bet the benefits outway the costs over an entire population. Maybe not by much, but i bet its a net benefit.

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

#86

Post by fumblebee »

I'm sure many folks here will be familiar with Andrew Huberman. If not, I highly recommend listing to his podcast, The Huberman Lab Podcast. Relevant to this discussion is his brilliant episode on alcohol [1]: "What Alcohol Does to Your Body, Brain & Health". Boy, was this episode a life-changing listen for me. The conclusion is the same as the linked study, that no level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.

[1] https://hubermanlab.com/what-alcohol-does-to-your-body-brain...

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

#87

Post by TOMDM »

shanebellone wrote: post #62
TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> refuse a beer in Germany is an affront that I would like to weigh against the risk of cancer Refusing a cigarette used to have a similar insult; and also you weren’t cool if you refused That’s changed after decades of press and cancer warning labels on tobacco. Let’s hope the same happens with alcohol.

"Let’s hope the same happens with alcohol." Why? You have all the required information to make an educated decision for yourself. Others do too. Allow them to decide without harassment. I quit smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol years ago now. As the calculus changed, my habits followed suit. Everyone should be allowed to choose how they live.

I think the parent comment agrees with you?

They want to be able to choose whether to engage with alcohol without the attached stigma.

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

#88

Post by scotteric »

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #63
stephen_g wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And this is the Lancet article summarising the research: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpub/article/PIIS2468-2... The proportion of cancers attributable to alcohol is 4.1% of all cases, from [1]. Of that, the ‘Light to Moderate’ alcohol category ( 1. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2...

Gee, how did two bottles of wine / 7 pints of beer a week get categorised as light? For me light would be one or two beers a week max.

Conventional wisdom used to be that a glass of wine or a beer everyday was healthy.

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

#89

Post by josefx »

ascotan wrote: post #25

Well according to the American Cancer Society, alcoholic beverages are a Group 1 Carcinogen. Right up there with Asbestos, UV radiation, Tobacco smoke, and Diesel exhaust. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/general-info/kn... There probably a story somewhere as to why cigarettes get big labels and beer cans don't.

From the bullet points on top of the list:

> The lists describe the level of evidence that something can cause cancer, not how likely it is that something will cause cancer in any person (or how much it might raise your risk). For example, IARC considers there to be strong evidence that both tobacco smoking and eating processed meat can cause cancer, so both are listed as “carcinogenic to humans.” But smoking is much more likely to cause cancer than eating processed meat, even though both are in the same category.

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

#90

Post by epmaybe »

zabzonk wrote: post #35
ascotan wrote: post #25

Well according to the American Cancer Society, alcoholic beverages are a Group 1 Carcinogen. Right up there with Asbestos, UV radiation, Tobacco smoke, and Diesel exhaust. https://www.cancer.org/healthy/cancer-causes/general-info/kn... There probably a story somewhere as to why cigarettes get big labels and beer cans don't.

the story is that cigarettes are well researched and documented to cause agressive lung cancers, heart disease and many other problems. the story on alcohol is much less clear and even if true, much lower risk

This is correct. Do you know what percent of lung cancer is attributable to smoking? 90%! 9/10 lung cancer deaths are attributable to smoking.

Compare this to ~5% of cancer related death attributable to alcohol use.

It's just not even an accurate comparison.

To be honest though? I am willing to bet that cost to healthcare system for alcohol related illness is outpacing that of smoking related illness. Cirrhosis of the liver is a very costly disease when it gets close to end stage.

Post reply on HN