"safest level of drinking is none" - new study

There was a woman lived a few houses up from us with her parents for years, died at 35.

Cancer took her, and I watched it take her, I noticed she was looking gaunt and pale weeks (months actually) before she broke the news that she had been diagnosed with terminal cancer. I watched her steadyily waste away - how she slowly progessively declined - right from losing weight to reluctantly giving up work then becoming less mobile/wheelchair bound.


35.

She neither smoked nor drank, wasn't married, didn't even have a boyfriend, you know what lads, I'd guess the poor girl was never even rode, but there you go - cancer claimed her.

Tldr.

Cancer doesn't give a fcuk whether you smoke/drink/eat fatty foods or anything else. Everything in moderation they say.

When your time is up its time to go. Simple as that.

Shiloh Rancid Tumor wrote: »

It's published in a reputable journal. This is the most credible source of information available.

It's not hugely surprising to hear alcohol seems to be a greater health concern than previously thought. Skepticism with this seems more likely to be because the news is unwelcome, rather than unlikely or lacking credibility.

No one doubts the credibility of the journal and the authors behind it, no less than they might doubt similar journals or studys that tell us a daily glass of red wine or beer is good for your heart.

This journal tells us the safest level of drinking is not to drink.


Cancer doesn't kill ye, the heart will so?

Sure the lad driving the 48A might have a coughing fit and crash through the barrier of the flyover and die. Along with the 34 other passengers on board.

It’s funny reading all the deluesional reactions to this report. Irish people in particular have such a culturaly unhealthy relationship with alcohol that they will always look to excuse anything negative towards the substance.

I work in insurance and while a lot of illnesses are gene related it doesn’t mean drinking or smoking doesn’t affect your mortality. Some genes won’t be affected by over drinking as much as others but all people with all genes will be affected negatively, it’s just to different degrees.

When you apply for insurance you pay more as a smoker or if you drink in an unhealthy manner. There are multiple ways you can get fatty livers but binge drinking is one of them. This could cost you more for insurance.

So why does that matter? Insurance companies charge you more because statistically speaking you are more likely to claim on the policy if you do certain things or don’t take care of yourself (including drinking or smoking).

When I goto insurance seminars and they just talk of people as numbers , statistics, it’s frightening how often people get sick and how our behaviors do make a difference. People either don’t want to believe or know that their behaviors can make them ill.

I have no skin in the game on this thread and I know this will not be a popular post. But alcohol is dangerous on many levels if you don’t drink naturally drink carefully and in a balanced manner.


Most things in life are fine in moderation. I think if you follow that mantra you will usually be ok. The problem Can be that people have different views on what is moderate. If you are drinking with heavy drinkers you might be moderate in that group but still have a bad habit.

Incidentally when I see these sort of science studies come out I usually wonder where the backing for the studies came from. Dig deep enough and most of these things are prob commissioned by the alcohol industry to find the “right” results....