Peer Reveiwed Study About Alcohol

Dang it. This is depressing news. :cool:

I just finished a pleasant meal accompanied by at least three glasses of tasty wine. My guests are probably waiting upon an after-lunch aperitif or two for watching the sunset over the horizon and socializing.

Excuse me while I get more ice and fresh glasses. Popcorn is free here as everything else in is the kitchen.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31310-2/fulltext

[Moderating]

Since this doesn’t seem to be about the flavor or other aesthetic qualities of the drinks, I’ll just move it on over to MPSIMS.

So no summary huh?

Ghod, I hate science.

Eh, it’ll come back around. <glug glug glug>

Close but I think you just missed the mark… :wink:

He said “aesthetic”, not “anesthetic”.

I meant the thread didn’t quite make it into MPSIMS.

Good perspective at the end:

I’ll punt it over there.

Meh. I’ve had a good run. Well, walk. Maybe vaguely sauntering.

(Pours a refill on his Wild Turkey)

I was so upset over this news that I poured myself a big snifter of cognac. And I hadn’t even finished my dinner wine, only because I hadn’t noticed that I had some left in the glass when I brought in the cognac, though I did finish my gin and tonics before dinner. I guess I’ll finish the wine after the cognac. And then another snifter of cognac. After that I might read the article, and maybe have a Drambuie or something before bed.

It’s all fun and games until Colibri shows up.

(For those lacking context, Chronos moved it into Thread Games.)

I’m still gonna drink. In fact I’m going to go drink right now. So there!

I’m thinking a screwdriver…

Me? I am going to have a Bloody Mary and watch the sunrise in the east. And call a cab to take me home.

The other day I had four Bloody Marys and watched the sunrise in the west.

And yet the human race has somehow survived the last 12,000 years…

It is the nature of surveys that, if you don’t like the conclusions of this one, just wait for the next one to come along.

The one before this one (the one that set the UK weekly limit at 14 units) was based on a methodology of self reporting drinking levels. i.e. it knew that people vastly under-reported what they drank but regardless the units limit was calculated on that under-reported figure and no adjustment was made.

When questioned on this by the BBC some years ago, it was put to the authors that if you are saying 14 units was the safe limit based on figures that you know are too low then must it not be true to say that the actual number of real drinks a person could have is really higher than that?

Though that was logically and inescapably true they could not bring themselves to admit it. Make of that what you will but to me it calls into question any detailed advice they give beyond, Don’t drink too much and have some days off.

It’s not just a one study says one thing and the next study says another.

The negative-side official, peer reviewed research is massive.

There is the occasional “study” that “proves” a couple of drinks a day is okay or even beneficial. Those get a ton of news for obvious reasons.

But they always seem to have problems.

There was a study saying moderate alcohol was good. People knew the study was flawed right away. The study included recovering alcoholics in the “non-drinker” group! Once you put those people in the “drinker” group the numbers came out exactly as you expect.

Another one was a meta-study: a study of studies. Easy to manipulate by choosing certain ones and weighting them appropriately. It turned out to be funded by a liquor backed organization. And the authors did not mention this funding in the paper! This is a big no-no. It violated the journal’s and the author’s medical school policies. Source of funding must be disclosed to avoid exactly this sort of nonsense.

Note that these “positive” studies get a ton of news. The debunking doesn’t. Hmmm.

The new study doesn’t tell us anything we already didn’t know for a long time.

And, this is why I quit drinking.