5 ms·

It's important to study the risks associated with alcohol, but it's also important to be pragmatic about how we reduce risk in our lives. Everything is risky,

It's important to study the risks associated with alcohol, but it's also important to be pragmatic about how we reduce risk in our lives. Everything is risky, riding a horse is risky, going sailing is risky, doing a stressful job is risky. Running marathons often causes health problems. Being sedentary causes health problems. Being lonely is terrible for your health. Having a beer with your friends could be as important as another evening in the gym.

NullPrefix 9y ago
Go to gym with your friends. The only sensible solution.
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  Sure, when they start putting lifting racks in concert venues.
Fifer82 9y ago
I always wonder why they focus on the effects of say, a few beers, or someone who has a smoke in the morning. Yet all the health problems caused by the very air we breath in cities, well that is fine.
- ben_w 9y ago
  It is studied, it’s not fine, it’s just not newsworthy at the moment. It’s barely newsworthy around here even when it exceeds legal limits.
  - Fifer82 9y ago
    This is just one source of the many examples I have read over the years painting a similar picture. >> In the UK, 8.39% of deaths were due to pollution It always seems pretty high. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-has-one-of-the-worst-pollution-death-rates-in-europe-major-study-reveals-a3663381.html https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-has-one-of-the-worst-p...
    - ben_w 9y ago
      At that level I assume it’s conflating “caused” and “contributed to”, and the language seems to be mixing air pollution with all other forms of pollution. However, I cannot remember ever seeing a front page story on the topic when walking past the newspapers in the supermarket. (Not claiming there are zero front page headlines, but “Statins Do A Thing” and “Princesses Diana XYZ” swamp any about pollution).
- icebraining 9y ago
  Multiple European cities are planning on banning diesel cars for that reason, whereas nobody is planning on banning alcoholic drinks.
  - nsomaru 9y ago
    Perhaps because you can choose what you drink but not what you breathe.
kelnos 9y ago
Absolutely agreed. The article is very grave-sounding, but they're talking about people who drink 100-200 grams of alcohol per week having a life expectancy 6 months shorter than those who drink 0-100 grams per week. 200-350 grams drops you by 1-2 years. So? It seems like a big fuss over something that isn't expected to reduce the length of your life all that much, whereas there are many other common or even routine activities in life that carry much more risk. Certainly if someone gets to a point where they're dependent on alcohol, or it's negatively impacting their life, that's a problem. But that's not what we're talking about here.
- posterboy 9y ago
  2 years is more than 2% if that's not a lot, would you mind sending me 2% of your pay check? I will have to find something to compensate, but first I'd be curious what the relatively huge advantage of loosing 2 years to alcohol is in your mind, for sake of the argument.
  - forgottenpass 9y ago
    I already have multiple hobbies that consume more than 2% of my income per year. If you can find something to sell me that I enjoy more than skiing, you're more than welcome to my skiing budget.
    - posterboy 9y ago
      How about liquor for 2% of your budget? If that's not to our taste, I'd still wonder why alcohol consumption should warrant loosing two years of life.
      - kelnos 8y ago
        Perhaps because someone enjoys it? It's a bit holier-than-thou to suggest that skiing is a noble way to spend your time and money (and life), while drinking alcohol is not. And regardless, you've chosen to focus on one of the larger estimates. Six months at the 100-200g level is around 0.7% of life. You're certainly free to think I'm short-sighted by valuing a little drinking more than 0.7% of my life expectancy, but I'm also free to ignore you; it's my life, and I get to decide what makes me happy.
abandonliberty 9y ago
How quickly and effectively our addicted minds rationalize our behaviors. Thanks to this we have plenty of studies that show slight benefits from drinking! But our reasoning isn't sound. - Participation in other risky activities doesn't justify drinking - Alternative to drinking is not loneliness We must be pragmatic about the society we live in, but societies can change and so can we. Of course, I do have that bottle of wine to finish at home . . .

NullPrefix 9y ago

Go to gym with your friends. The only sensible solution.

KozmoNau7 9y ago
Sure, when they start putting lifting racks in concert venues.

Fifer82 9y ago

I always wonder why they focus on the effects of say, a few beers, or someone who has a smoke in the morning. Yet all the health problems caused by the very air we breath in cities, well that is fine.

ben_w 9y ago
It is studied, it’s not fine, it’s just not newsworthy at the moment. It’s barely newsworthy around here even when it exceeds legal limits.
- Fifer82 9y ago
  This is just one source of the many examples I have read over the years painting a similar picture. >> In the UK, 8.39% of deaths were due to pollution It always seems pretty high. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-has-one-of-the-worst-pollution-death-rates-in-europe-major-study-reveals-a3663381.html https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-has-one-of-the-worst-p...
  - ben_w 9y ago
    At that level I assume it’s conflating “caused” and “contributed to”, and the language seems to be mixing air pollution with all other forms of pollution. However, I cannot remember ever seeing a front page story on the topic when walking past the newspapers in the supermarket. (Not claiming there are zero front page headlines, but “Statins Do A Thing” and “Princesses Diana XYZ” swamp any about pollution).
icebraining 9y ago
Multiple European cities are planning on banning diesel cars for that reason, whereas nobody is planning on banning alcoholic drinks.
- nsomaru 9y ago
  Perhaps because you can choose what you drink but not what you breathe.

kelnos 9y ago

Absolutely agreed. The article is very grave-sounding, but they're talking about people who drink 100-200 grams of alcohol per week having a life expectancy 6 months shorter than those who drink 0-100 grams per week. 200-350 grams drops you by 1-2 years. So? It seems like a big fuss over something that isn't expected to reduce the length of your life all that much, whereas there are many other common or even routine activities in life that carry much more risk. Certainly if someone gets to a point where they're dependent on alcohol, or it's negatively impacting their life, that's a problem. But that's not what we're talking about here.

posterboy 9y ago
2 years is more than 2% if that's not a lot, would you mind sending me 2% of your pay check? I will have to find something to compensate, but first I'd be curious what the relatively huge advantage of loosing 2 years to alcohol is in your mind, for sake of the argument.
- forgottenpass 9y ago
  I already have multiple hobbies that consume more than 2% of my income per year. If you can find something to sell me that I enjoy more than skiing, you're more than welcome to my skiing budget.
  - posterboy 9y ago
    How about liquor for 2% of your budget? If that's not to our taste, I'd still wonder why alcohol consumption should warrant loosing two years of life.
    - kelnos 8y ago
      Perhaps because someone enjoys it? It's a bit holier-than-thou to suggest that skiing is a noble way to spend your time and money (and life), while drinking alcohol is not. And regardless, you've chosen to focus on one of the larger estimates. Six months at the 100-200g level is around 0.7% of life. You're certainly free to think I'm short-sighted by valuing a little drinking more than 0.7% of my life expectancy, but I'm also free to ignore you; it's my life, and I get to decide what makes me happy.

abandonliberty 9y ago

How quickly and effectively our addicted minds rationalize our behaviors. Thanks to this we have plenty of studies that show slight benefits from drinking! But our reasoning isn't sound. - Participation in other risky activities doesn't justify drinking - Alternative to drinking is not loneliness We must be pragmatic about the society we live in, but societies can change and so can we. Of course, I do have that bottle of wine to finish at home . . .