4 ms·

The goal here is to dispel the "extends health" and similar claims often made about light or moderate drinking. If you take a look at the studies you can deter

by arsome 4y ago

The goal here is to dispel the "extends health" and similar claims often made about light or moderate drinking. If you take a look at the studies you can determine how much of an increased risk you're comfortable with. For example, figure 5 in https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(18)31310-2/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... When doing this analysis though be sure to note that scientists studying this use 10g drinks, which is 12.5mL of ethanol, one tallboy of 6.5% beer is therefore about 2.5 drinks.

paiute 4y ago
I might be wrong here, but I have never heard the claim that 2 beers might be good for your health. I have heard that with wine, but that's not a claim that alcohol is good for your health.
- keymon-o 4y ago
  Scientific claims, of course not. “Scientific” claims, however, should not be that surprising.
- jmdeschamps 4y ago
  It's the polyphenols associated with grapes in red wine that might be "healthy", not the alcohol... But then again... https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-red-wine-good-actually-for-your-heart-2018021913285 https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-red-wine-good-actuall...
- djkivi 4y ago
  Here is WebMD with an article about how beer may have potential health benefits: https://www.webmd.com/diet/beer-good-for-you https://www.webmd.com/diet/beer-good-for-you
- rsync 4y ago
  "I might be wrong here, but I have never heard the claim that 2 beers might be good for your health." What we see - empirically - is that light/moderate drinkers have better overall health outcomes than both heavy drinkers and people who consume zero alcohol. The outcomes of the heavy drinkers seem self-evident so we don't need to bother with that ... it is the relative better health vs. non-drinkers that is interesting. One conclusion that many people draw, and which you are alluding to, is that alcohol has properties that are beneficial in small doses. However, a much simpler and more explanatory conclusion is that in developed, western (or, "global north") countries there is nobody that isn't drinking and the individuals that consume zero alcohol are doing so because it really affects them, or bothers them, etc. They are less robust, generally, and therefore have health outcomes that are worse than light/moderate drinkers. I draw your attention to the fact that NFL players have lower all-cause mortality and live longer lives than the general public. Is that because violent collisions and football playing, generally, magically helps them ? Of course not. They're just stronger than we are.

by arsome 4y ago

paiute 4y ago

I might be wrong here, but I have never heard the claim that 2 beers might be good for your health. I have heard that with wine, but that's not a claim that alcohol is good for your health.

keymon-o 4y ago
Scientific claims, of course not. “Scientific” claims, however, should not be that surprising.
jmdeschamps 4y ago
It's the polyphenols associated with grapes in red wine that might be "healthy", not the alcohol... But then again... https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-red-wine-good-actually-for-your-heart-2018021913285 https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-red-wine-good-actuall...
djkivi 4y ago
Here is WebMD with an article about how beer may have potential health benefits: https://www.webmd.com/diet/beer-good-for-you https://www.webmd.com/diet/beer-good-for-you
rsync 4y ago
"I might be wrong here, but I have never heard the claim that 2 beers might be good for your health." What we see - empirically - is that light/moderate drinkers have better overall health outcomes than both heavy drinkers and people who consume zero alcohol. The outcomes of the heavy drinkers seem self-evident so we don't need to bother with that ... it is the relative better health vs. non-drinkers that is interesting. One conclusion that many people draw, and which you are alluding to, is that alcohol has properties that are beneficial in small doses. However, a much simpler and more explanatory conclusion is that in developed, western (or, "global north") countries there is nobody that isn't drinking and the individuals that consume zero alcohol are doing so because it really affects them, or bothers them, etc. They are less robust, generally, and therefore have health outcomes that are worse than light/moderate drinkers. I draw your attention to the fact that NFL players have lower all-cause mortality and live longer lives than the general public. Is that because violent collisions and football playing, generally, magically helps them ? Of course not. They're just stronger than we are.