4 ms·
It's worth noting, but effect size is also an important bit. The Wikipedia page links to a study suggesting that around 4% of cancers are attributable to alcoho
by asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
It's worth noting, but effect size is also an important bit. The Wikipedia page links to a study suggesting that around 4% of cancers are attributable to alcohol consumption [1]. In some sense, that's a lot, but in another sense, it isn't really? It's also not clear to me how much of that burden is borne by heavy drinkers vs. moderate drinkers.
The studies I saw seemed to suggest a very clear causal association between alcohol consumption and cancer, and with no threshold (i.e. any consumption increases your risk). However, although the evidence was strong, the effect sizes were mild, especially at mild levels of consumption. I would love to be better informed on this, but my current stance is that alcohol is super fun, and the number of life-years you lose on average from consuming it aren't too numerous. You have to die of something.
[1]: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.21903 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.21903
- acjohnson55 6y agoIt what sense is 4% of all cancer cases not a lot?
- asdfasgasdgasdg 6y agoThis sense: giving up a cherished vice to reduce your risk of dying of cancer by 1/25 might not be considered a good trade, depending on one's preferences.