3 ms·

Others would disagree: The Truth We Won’t Admit: Drinking Is Healthy https://psmag.com/social-justice/truth-wont-admit-drinking-healthy-87891 https://psmag.co

Others would disagree: The Truth We Won’t Admit: Drinking Is Healthy https://psmag.com/social-justice/truth-wont-admit-drinking-healthy-87891 https://psmag.com/social-justice/truth-wont-admit-drinking-h... (Before you downvote, google the author Stanton Peele)

littlestymaar 8y ago
Refuting a peer-reviewed study (in the Lancet, no less) with an opinion post in “Pacific standard” is interesting. An the argument of authority never holds, we've seen Nobel prize winners beeing fond of conspiracy theories or other bullshit before…
- jayalpha 8y ago
  ONE Study? I am sure I can google you a dozen other studies that show that moderate alcohol consumption, red wine consumption oder resveratrol consumption (must be the resveratrol, can't be the alcohol) is healthy. And had you actually read the article and not just vomited here into the forum then you would have realized that Pele cites and discusses many studies in the article.
  - littlestymaar 8y ago
    That's obviously how science works: just counting how many studies there is on each side, without paying attention to the publication or the methodology (preferably without even reading the abstract), and the truth is the one with the higher score… I've read your article (as well as the study cited above, did you ?) And it doesn't discuss several studies: it cherry-picks some that go in his direction and dismisses the others … Had you read the study, you'd have realized that: - the study came 4 years after the opinion post you shared. - the main argument of the post “a little amount of red wine is beneficial”, which is what we though in the past, has been refuted since: it's an artifact due to a co-founder (social status) and if you control for it, this surprising effect disappear (an so does the argument). On a historical note, you can find scores of this kind of article published in the 50s but talking about the absence of health impact of tobacco. Including many big scientific names of the time, most of them were smokers btw :).
    - jayalpha 8y ago
      "That's obviously how science works: just counting how many studies there is on each side, without paying attention to the publication or the methodology (preferably without even reading the abstract), and the truth is the one with the higher score…" The truth. Obviously. Kary Banks Mullis hast still the rejection letters from Nature and Science and kept them for his Noble price winning works. I don't know how much you know about science but looks to me you can't tell your ass from your elbow.

littlestymaar 8y ago

Refuting a peer-reviewed study (in the Lancet, no less) with an opinion post in “Pacific standard” is interesting. An the argument of authority never holds, we've seen Nobel prize winners beeing fond of conspiracy theories or other bullshit before…

jayalpha 8y ago
ONE Study? I am sure I can google you a dozen other studies that show that moderate alcohol consumption, red wine consumption oder resveratrol consumption (must be the resveratrol, can't be the alcohol) is healthy. And had you actually read the article and not just vomited here into the forum then you would have realized that Pele cites and discusses many studies in the article.
- littlestymaar 8y ago
  That's obviously how science works: just counting how many studies there is on each side, without paying attention to the publication or the methodology (preferably without even reading the abstract), and the truth is the one with the higher score… I've read your article (as well as the study cited above, did you ?) And it doesn't discuss several studies: it cherry-picks some that go in his direction and dismisses the others … Had you read the study, you'd have realized that: - the study came 4 years after the opinion post you shared. - the main argument of the post “a little amount of red wine is beneficial”, which is what we though in the past, has been refuted since: it's an artifact due to a co-founder (social status) and if you control for it, this surprising effect disappear (an so does the argument). On a historical note, you can find scores of this kind of article published in the 50s but talking about the absence of health impact of tobacco. Including many big scientific names of the time, most of them were smokers btw :).
  - jayalpha 8y ago
    "That's obviously how science works: just counting how many studies there is on each side, without paying attention to the publication or the methodology (preferably without even reading the abstract), and the truth is the one with the higher score…" The truth. Obviously. Kary Banks Mullis hast still the rejection letters from Nature and Science and kept them for his Noble price winning works. I don't know how much you know about science but looks to me you can't tell your ass from your elbow.