What is the Optimal Amount of Alcohol to Consume for Health Reasons?

[InTheLight]

Answer: None. And the answer was arrived at by a number of massive studies, reviews of past studies, and an analysis of hundreds of databases. (So not a couple of slanted studies.)
---
To minimize health risks, the optimal amount of alcohol someone should consume is none. That’s the simple, surprising conclusion of a massive study, co-authored by 512 researchers from 243 institutions, published Thursday in the Lancet.

The researchers built a database of more than a thousand alcohol studies and data sources, as well as death and disability records from 195 countries and territories between 1990 and 2016. The goal was to estimate how much alcohol affects the risk of 23 health problems. The number that jumped out, in the end, was zero. Anything more than that was associated with health risks.

Safest level of alcohol consumption is none, study finds
---

This should end the "Drinking is good for you" debate once and for all.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

[Revmitchell]

If you're one of the third of all humankind who drinks alcohol, take note: There's no amount of liquor, wine or beer that is safe for your overall health, according to a new analysis of 2016 global alcohol consumption and disease risk.

Alcohol was the leading risk factor for disease and premature death in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49 worldwide in 2016, accounting for nearly one in 10 deaths, according to the study, published Thursday in the journal The Lancet.
For all ages, alcohol was associated with 2.8 million deaths that year.


Those deaths include alcohol-related cancer and cardiovascular diseases, infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, intentional injury such as violence and self-harm, and traffic accidents and other unintentional injuries such as drowning and fires.

No amount of alcohol is good for your overall health, global study says - CNN

 

[carpro]

From Lancet?

Good. I was going to recommend someone warn the British, but apparently they already know.

 

[carpro]

Answer: None.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

You stole my thunder.

 

[Benjamin]

Answer: None.

Obviously they got it wrong:

1Ti 5:23
(23) Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

The Bible said it,
I believe it,
that settles it!

 

[church mouse guy]

Jesus turned the water into wine....

Seriously, the only reason Baptists go to a liquor store is to get empty boxes....

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Answer: None. And the answer was arrived at by a number of massive studies, reviews of past studies, and an analysis of hundreds of databases. (So not a couple of slanted studies.)
---
To minimize health risks, the optimal amount of alcohol someone should consume is none. That’s the simple, surprising conclusion of a massive study, co-authored by 512 researchers from 243 institutions, published Thursday in the Lancet.

The researchers built a database of more than a thousand alcohol studies and data sources, as well as death and disability records from 195 countries and territories between 1990 and 2016. The goal was to estimate how much alcohol affects the risk of 23 health problems. The number that jumped out, in the end, was zero. Anything more than that was associated with health risks.

Safest level of alcohol consumption is none, study finds
---

This should end the "Drinking is good for you" debate once and for all.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

That’s not the Celtic view.

 

[InTheLight]

Obviously they got it wrong:

1Ti 5:23
(23) Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

The Bible said it,
I believe it,
that settles it!

Bible says to quit drinking water! [emoji50]

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Reynolds]

Answer: None. And the answer was arrived at by a number of massive studies, reviews of past studies, and an analysis of hundreds of databases. (So not a couple of slanted studies.)
---
To minimize health risks, the optimal amount of alcohol someone should consume is none. That’s the simple, surprising conclusion of a massive study, co-authored by 512 researchers from 243 institutions, published Thursday in the Lancet.

The researchers built a database of more than a thousand alcohol studies and data sources, as well as death and disability records from 195 countries and territories between 1990 and 2016. The goal was to estimate how much alcohol affects the risk of 23 health problems. The number that jumped out, in the end, was zero. Anything more than that was associated with health risks.

Safest level of alcohol consumption is none, study finds
---

This should end the "Drinking is good for you" debate once and for all.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

I heard a doctor on the radio saying this new study is a garbage study and will be refuted in short order. I, for the record, don't drink.

 

[InTheLight]

I heard a doctor on the radio saying this new study is a garbage study and will be refuted in short order. I, for the record, don't drink.

The study is a compilation of more than a thousand alcohol studies and data sources, as well as death and disability records from 195 countries. I doubt it can be refuted.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

[Reynolds]

The study is a compilation of more than a thousand alcohol studies and data sources, as well as death and disability records from 195 countries. I doubt it can be refuted.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

We shall see.
If we are truly concerned with health, food is an exponentially worse problem than alcohol.

 

[InTheLight]

We shall see.
If we are truly concerned with health, food is an exponentially worse problem than alcohol.

Doubtful that food causes cirrhosis, interpersonal violence, self-harm and transportation accidents, some of the items on the list of health concerns that alcohol impacts.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[church mouse guy]

Doubtful that food causes cirrhosis, interpersonal violence, self-harm and transportation accidents, some of the items on the list of health concerns that alcohol impacts.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

I agree. Also, they used to say that alcohol causes the natural cavities in the brain to enlarge and additional cavities to develop according to CAT scans.

The federal government has regulated the rescue missions so much that they are now useless in alcohol treatment. For example, The Salvation Army and others accepted federal funds and a couple of decades back the feds ruled that The Salvation Army and other church-run rescue missions could no longer compel people to attend church services. So instead of "Soup, Soap, and Salvation," now all they can offer to the transient alcoholic is Soup and Soap. Also, in Indiana, the state hospitals have abolished the alcohol treatment programs so that the government has more or less dumped these people on the streets or in the local jails.

Also, today's addicts are more difficult to deal with because they are poly-addicted. By that, it is meant that they are addicted not only to alcohol but also to drugs. According to one Indianapolis area psychiatrist, alcoholics in treatment are passive and dependent but drug addicts in treatment are hostile and violent.

Back to the point about cirrhosis, interpersonal violence, and the others, alcoholics die young.

I believe the best treatment for alcoholism is the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[Reynolds]

Doubtful that food causes cirrhosis, interpersonal violence, self-harm and transportation accidents, some of the items on the list of health concerns that alcohol impacts.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

More health problems in U.S. due to food than alcohol. Obesity can cause cirrhosis. I found that out when my first cousin was diagnosed with it.

The Health Risks of Obesity

 

[InTheLight]

More health problems in U.S. due to food than alcohol. Obesity can cause cirrhosis. I found that out when my first cousin was diagnosed with it.

The Health Risks of Obesity

People need to eat. They don't need to drink alcohol.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

[Reynolds]

People need to eat. They don't need to drink alcohol.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

Cop out answer. Gluttony and drunkenness are the same. As my seminary professor once said, "Fat preachers not going to preach about their pet sin."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I heard a doctor on the radio saying this new study is a garbage study and will be refuted in short order. I, for the record, don't drink.

I will.... oh never mind

 

[Covenanter]

We shall see.
If we are truly concerned with health, food is an exponentially worse problem than alcohol.

Yes & No !
The UK National Health Service (NHS) recommend everyone eats according to the "Eatwell Guide" which results in a high carbohydrate, high vegetable & fruit, moderate amounts of low fat protein & dairy, & very low fat & sugar. The UK charity "Diabetes UK" endorse that guide for all diabetics, & allow alcohol in small amounts.

The net result is every increasing obesity & a diabetes epidemic.

I've been type 2 diabetic for 20 years, diagnosed in 2,000. I was recommended to follow that diet, but I was told by the doctor that diabetes is progressive & however well I followed their advice my health would worsen, needing increasing medication & suffering a range of complications - blindness, stroke, heart attack, amputation, kidney failure ....

They were right, & after 8 years I was becoming crippled with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, together with the beginning of eye & kidney problems. Doctor said he could refer me to hospital for investigation.

Instead I went on the internet, diabetes.co.uk/forum , where patients shared experience. I learnt from a type 1, who'd suffered a car crash during a hypo, that the problem is the advice we'd been given. Instead, cut the carbs out of the diet. Carbs metabolise to glucose, which cause all the health problems. Get your energy from health natural fats including butter, olive oil, nuts, etc. NOT processed oils & spreads.

I stopped eating all the obvious carbs, & within 3 months I was out of pain, fit & well & playing tennis again. That was 10 years ago. I'm still fit & well, playing tennis at club standard, & have no diabetes complications.

 

[Covenanter]

My 5 y-o granddaughter suffers from epilepsy, which became increasingly severe this year. They tried various drugs, some so powerful that she was completely knocked out for several days. She's been in hospital for the past 5 weeks. Her Dad has been in with her on extended compassionate leave from work. Mum has helped while caring for their 3 y-o.

Long ago I suggested the ketogenic diet which is similar to my low carb, healthy fat diet (LCHF), but stricter. In the last few weeks they have introduced it, while reducing the powerful drugs that only stopped the fits by knocking her out. Happily she is responding to keto, only has a few minor fits, & is much more alert. She will soon be home.

So why isn't LCHF recommended for everybody?

This is an excellent introduction lecture - 26 minutes of life transforming advice.
The lecturer, Gary Fettke, studied diet in relation to diabetes when he, as a surgeon, was performing ever increasing numbers of amputations of diabetic patients. The Australian dietitians objected to a non-dietitian giving diet advice & if he gives patients diet advice he could be completely struck off as a medical practitioner for giving advice in a field he hasn't trained in - even if that advice is accepted as valid. His wife gives the diet advice - she's not professionally qualified & can't be struck off!

The food manufacturers have a powerful lobby. Kelloggs used their SDA tax status to promote vegetarianism as a religious doctrine, with their own pseudo medical information. But note - breakfast cereals are poor in nutrition.

Today most nutritionists, obesity experts, and physicians argue that the easy digestibility the Kelloggs worked so hard to achieve is not such a good thing. Eating processed cereals, it turns out, creates a sudden spike in blood sugar, followed by an increase in insulin, the hormone that enables cells to use glucose. A few hours later, the insulin rush triggers a blood sugar “crash,” loss of energy, and a ravenous hunger for an early lunch.
But it's all very profitable.

 

[church mouse guy]

Kellogg now dabbles in leftist causes. I think that their sales are down and they are having some recalls. Young people aren't eating cereal for breakfast anymore. I don't like vegan stuff, do you?