Beer before liquor, never been sicker.

Why? It’s not the combination of the two as “liquor before beer, you’re in the clear” is a similar truism.

I grew up with, “Beer on whiskey, mighty risky; whiskey on beer, in the clear.”

Here’s how I figure it:
When one moves from liquor to beer, one is ‘stepping down’ alcohol-content wise and less likely to overstep one’s bounds by swallowing too quickly.

Err, something like that. . .

“There is nothing you ought to do, for the simple reason that you know nothing, nothing whatever- make a mental note of that, if you please.”
-V. Nabokov

Hmmm, I don’t know about whiskey and beer (don’t drink either) but I do know I can do just fine on rum and coke, not a problem. Introduce the infamously party-crashing tequila into the equation and all hell breaks loose. “oh, I’m doing alright, crusing along at a steady altitude” me thinks to me self. Wrong! I agree, it’s the sudden increase in alcohol content that sneaks up on the brain and does a sucker-punch to the senses.

Not that I touch it either, but there is a similar debate on which to take first, alcohol or pot? Apparently, it makes quite the difference. (shrug)

You can’t save your face and your ass at the same time.

Let me clarify- based on home tests (not double-blind) I feel nauseous if I drink beer prior to hard liquors (whiskey, vodka, gin, etc…) but I usually don’t feel sick right away if I start directly with the hard liquors. What is it about beer that makes drinking it prior to hard liquor drinking less palatable than not drinking anything before consuming hard liquor?

No matter how shit-faced I’ve been, I don’t get hangovers! :slight_smile: I have no idea why, but I ain’t complaining!

Yer pal,

That probably explains your fall from grace.
God got sick of that perky morning-after angel meandering around rustling newspapers
and frying bacon… :wink:

I can attest to the fact that it’s possible to get sick from virtually any combination of alcoholic beverages, in any order, if you drink enough. The theory, however, is that after you chug a few beers, it’s hard to slow down and drink liquor at a reasonable pace; conversely, if you start by sipping liquor, you’re more likely to sip the beer as well.

Re the alcohol / pot thing: The much-vaunted anti-nausea powers of marijuana are GREATLY diminished if you’re already drunk enough to throw up when you start smoking. Trust me.

“Had I been around at the creation, I would have given some useful hints for the better ordering of the universe.”

  • Alfonso X

Regarding alcohol and pot. If I get stoned first, and then get drunk, I’m usually fine. A little slower on the draw, but ok.

However, if I get drunk, and then smoke pot, I get the spins big time. Sometimes so bad that the only thing to do is curl up on the bathroom floor and wait for either the room to stop turning around, or for my dinner to exit itself from my stomach. Or both, depending on how drunk I was before getting stoned. I don’t recommend it.

In college, I had just heard that any time you partook of any of the pairs beer-wine, beer-whiskey, wine-whiskey in the same evening, you would suffer.

My experience has been that speed of consumption is the only constant. I have had beer in the late afternoon, wine with dinner, and a nightcap or beer in the afternoon, a drink before dinner, and wine with dinner, or (family get togethers) whatever was close and open all through the afternoon and evening. (That would include draught beer, bourbon, scotch, white wine, and red wine. I don’t drink colorless distilled alcohol.)

The results? If I got stupid and drank without pacing myself, I suffered regardless of the order I drank. If I paid a bit of attention and drank a bit less over a longer time period, I didn’t suffer at all.

Drink less = less suffering? Maybe I ought to write a book on that. Think it’d sell?