Note that what this article is saying: > In all super-regions, among individuals aged 15–39 years, injuries accounted for the majority of alcohol-related DALYs

Note that what this article is saying: > In all super-regions, among individuals aged 15–39 years, injuries accounted for the majority of alcohol-related DALYs in 2020. And if we break down by type of injury and look at the top-listed cause, > transport injuries comprised 25·9% In other words, the reason why "alcohol is never good for people under 40" is largely because young people behave poorly when drinking--and they choose to drive when drunk. A "career alcoholic" in their 40s will probably be much better at controlling their behavior than somebody who drinks the same amount in their 20s (Edit: to be clear, there can be multiple reasons for this--your brain chemistry can adapt to the alcohol, and you can also get wiser). When I see quoted figures like 1.75 standard drinks per day as being "NDE" for some people, I think, jeez, I would have problems sleeping if I did that, and I have reasonably high alcohol tolerance (due to sex, mass, and ancestry). Considering that the quoted figures are averages per day, it makes sense that a percentage of the injuries are from the days when you drink more than average. 1.75 drinks per day could mean 2 drinks during the week, and then 5 drinks on Friday and another 5 drinks on Saturday. The fact that for some people, averaging 1.75 drinks per day has the same health risk as a non-drinker is just downright mind boggling to me. My takeaway here is that because injury is such a major factor, there are a lot of other public health policies that can improve outcomes besides just controlling the amount that people drink. It is, in fact, possible to create policies that affect how people behave when they are drunk.