4 ms·
> To take the claim "no amount of alcohol consumption is safe" seriously would mean you shouldn't eat bread, which contains a small amount of alcohol. No, it d
by tomtheelder 5y ago
> To take the claim "no amount of alcohol consumption is safe" seriously would mean you shouldn't eat bread, which contains a small amount of alcohol.
No, it doesn't mean this. What they mean is that any amount of alcohol consumption causes some amount of harm. From the research I have seen it seems to be more or less linear. Minuscule consumption means minimal harm.
The implication isn't that you or anyone else should necessarily reduce your consumption to zero. It's that it should not be assumed that there some level of consumption that causes no harm or is beneficial (as previously believed). That is what the phrase "no amount is safe" commonly means in medicine. It is a purely medical recommendation.
This is totally separate from a dietary guideline, which would weigh the risks of alcohol against the social reality of it's consumption. That is the way that you seem to be interpreting it.
Also I'm not the person you responded to originally, but interestingly it seems like arsenic, in tiny quantities, is actually essential to our biology.
- allturtles 5y ago> any amount of alcohol consumption causes some amount of harm There is no guarantee that you will suffer harm from a single drink. What it really means is that any amount of alcohol consumption carries some (possibly minute) risk of harm. This is not, IMO, equivalent to "unsafe", which generally means something well outside the bounds of normal risks that most people already take on in their everyday lives. If we accepted that "some risk of harm" = unsafe, we would have to describe using the stairs as unsafe, taking a shower as unsafe, putting up Christmas lights as unsafe, etc.
- tomtheelder 5y agoAnd medically those are unsafe. The crucial part, though, is that that's not at all to say you shouldn't do them. You are simply using a different understanding of the word safe than they are. This is a medical brief aimed at experts who should have no trouble understanding what claims are and are not being made. This is not a lifestyle or dietary recommendation. This is not a cost benefit analysis. This is a medical brief that states that no amount of consumption is safe. The takeaway categorically should not be that we should all reduce our intake to zero, which seems to be how folks are interpreting this. For what it's worth, I say all this as a regular drinker who has no intention of ceasing drinking.
- allturtles 5y agoI would argue that if those things are unsafe, the term unsafe has no useful meaning, i.e. life is unsafe. It's a policy brief, not a medical brief, it is pro-abstinence and recommends a variety of alcohol control policies, short of actual prohibition: "- Call for strict regulation of alcohol products - Advocate for minimum pricing of alcohol products - Build capacity internally and among peers to promote cessation of alcohol use and abstinence from alcohol ... - Prioritise alcohol control in national agendas for health and support policy coherence between health and other sectors" etc.
- babyshake 5y agoAt least death is safe. As in, dying will not increase your risk of death.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- dabbledash 5y agoIf time word “unsafe” means “carries more than zero risk” then it isn’t very useful to me to know whether a doctor considers something unsafe.
- tomtheelder 5y agoYes, but it's useful to them. That's the point.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]