Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It effects everyone differently

Correct, but it raises everyone's probability of developing cancer.

Raw amounts matter --- .00001 to .00002 is a huge increase. Do I care? No.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And yet I go to the beach once a summer and from my spot under an umbrella I watch a wave of humanity that is obese and sunburned and still standing out in the sun all day with their kids looking the same.

I don’t know OP. Alcohol is just one thing. Humans don’t always do the “right” things. Why focus on alcohol is my question. How do you even pick that out as the issue to get indignant about.

People may be looking at you as you do the tanned, fatties at the beach.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It effects everyone differently

Correct, but it raises everyone's probability of developing cancer.

Anonymous wrote:It effects everyone differently

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I drink it because I like it. And I'm not too concerned about the cancer risk. It doesn't affect everyone the same. And given all of the carcinogens we are exposed to, there's a good chance that if you do get cancer, it'll be because of something else.

A) this is a wildly uninformed opinion. you have no idea about the relative cancer risk of alcohol and how it affects everyone--the research is just starting to come through, but there is a clear and undeniable link between drinking and cancer. ignore it if you want, but don't pretend you understand the relative risk, because no one does.

B) nothing affects everyone the same... tobacco and nicotine dont' affect everyone the same. there are people who smoke their whole lives and dont' get cancer. there are lots of people who smoke who die of things other than cancer. neither of those facts have any relevance on the argument that you should not smoke because it is a high cancer risk. most people who smoke in any quantity for any moderate to long period will develop lung cancer... some people will develop lung cancer after smoking only a short period. alcohol is pretty similar, but the current research (still early) suggests that the risk of cancer from drinking is at least as serious as the risk of cancer from tobacco.

C) if you do get cancer, there's not a good chance it will be because of something else. it depends on the cancer and the person. but the research does show alcohol is very strongly connected to cancer. more strongly than a lto of other things we're concerned may be carcinogens.

D) I assume you don't smoke, or mishandle asbestos, etc. because you understand that while not ALL people get cancer from doing those things, the risk is not a joke. elevate alcohol to that level.

So you admit that "nothing affects everyone the same" but then go on to insist that because there's a link (which you also admit is "still early" and no one understands the "relative risk", my opinion about not being too concerned is somehow wildly uninformed. Got it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I drink it because I like it. And I'm not too concerned about the cancer risk. It doesn't affect everyone the same. And given all of the carcinogens we are exposed to, there's a good chance that if you do get cancer, it'll be because of something else.

A) this is a wildly uninformed opinion. you have no idea about the relative cancer risk of alcohol and how it affects everyone--the research is just starting to come through, but there is a clear and undeniable link between drinking and cancer. ignore it if you want, but don't pretend you understand the relative risk, because no one does.

B) nothing affects everyone the same... tobacco and nicotine dont' affect everyone the same. there are people who smoke their whole lives and dont' get cancer. there are lots of people who smoke who die of things other than cancer. neither of those facts have any relevance on the argument that you should not smoke because it is a high cancer risk. most people who smoke in any quantity for any moderate to long period will develop lung cancer... some people will develop lung cancer after smoking only a short period. alcohol is pretty similar, but the current research (still early) suggests that the risk of cancer from drinking is at least as serious as the risk of cancer from tobacco.

C) if you do get cancer, there's not a good chance it will be because of something else. it depends on the cancer and the person. but the research does show alcohol is very strongly connected to cancer. more strongly than a lto of other things we're concerned may be carcinogens.

D) I assume you don't smoke, or mishandle asbestos, etc. because you understand that while not ALL people get cancer from doing those things, the risk is not a joke. elevate alcohol to that level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am optimizing the quality of my life, not the quantity. Fine wines add immeasurably to that quality. It also enhances socialization, which is extremely beneficial for health and happiness.

smoking is also fun and looks cool... it would enhance my life a ton if it was consequence free. But it's not.

grow up

I did smoke for a few years, but gave it up 30 years ago when I realized that the risk/reward ratio was so unfavorable. The risk/reward ratio with alcohol is very different. There are cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking that partially offset the cancer risk. And, as I mentioned, the social benefits are huge. Many of the best times of my life have involved alcohol, and I wouldn’t trade that for a few more years of life (if that is even the trade-off - bear in mind that moderate drinkers outlive non-drinkers significantly. It is only when you start controlling for a lot of other factors that you can produce a result showing the harmful impact).

The research is new enough and still developing so you can't possibly say with any confidence what the real risk/rewards are. But we do know that the previous surgeon general was planning on adding cigarette style cancer warnings to booze and Trump killed it, and now his administration is trying to pull a study linking booze to breast cancer, in favor of an industry backed study finding that alcohol has cardiovascular benefits. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/health/alcohol-drinking-hhs-report.html

Remember, the studies that find it has cardiovascular benefits are almost all backed by the industry. The research that is coming out is pretty consistent that cancer risk is real and claims of cardiovascular benefits are shaky. It's also notable that the definition of "moderate drinking" that *MAY* have a cardiovascular benefit (though again, stressing that seems less likely) is set at 2 drinks a day for men, and one for women, and even without discussing the cancer issue, there was a push from the scientific end of the conversation that it should be lowered to 1 for men and less than 1 for women (industry pushed back on those changes).

So, if there's any cardiovascular benefit, it's might be found in women who have less than a drink a day. Not exactly social lubrication levels of drinking, more like a small glass of wine with dinner, a few times a week.

If you're genuinely interested (and you should be since you seem interested in your health) read more about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/03/health/alcohol-surgeon-general-warning.html

"There is no question that heavy consumption is harmful. But supporters of moderate drinking — including makers of wine, beer and spirits, and some physicians and scientists — argue that a little alcohol each day may reduce cardiovascular disease, the No. 1 killer in the United States.

Newer scientific studies have criticized the methodology of earlier studies, however, and have challenged that view, which was once a consensus.

While most cancer deaths occur at drinking levels that exceed the current recommended dietary guidelines, the risk for cancers of the breast, the mouth and the throat may rise with consumption of as little as one drink a day, or even less, Dr. Murthy said on Friday.

Overall, one of every six breast cancer cases is attributable to alcohol consumption, Dr. Murthy said. More recent studies have also linked moderate alcohol consumption to certain forms of heart disease, including atrial fibrillation, a heart arrhythmia."

Here is a fact for you : moderate drinkers live, on average, longer than never-drinkers. So it is not simply an artifact of people giving up alcohol for health reasons.

Now, it may be true that if you control for enough other factors you can still tease out enough harm that on net it is negative, but it clearly indicates that the negative impact of moderate alcohol consumption is not huge.

No. Drinkers do not live longer. Why are you jumping through all these hoops to justify drinking? Just say you need the buzz or fix because you are weak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am optimizing the quality of my life, not the quantity. Fine wines add immeasurably to that quality. It also enhances socialization, which is extremely beneficial for health and happiness.

smoking is also fun and looks cool... it would enhance my life a ton if it was consequence free. But it's not.

grow up

I did smoke for a few years, but gave it up 30 years ago when I realized that the risk/reward ratio was so unfavorable. The risk/reward ratio with alcohol is very different. There are cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking that partially offset the cancer risk. And, as I mentioned, the social benefits are huge. Many of the best times of my life have involved alcohol, and I wouldn’t trade that for a few more years of life (if that is even the trade-off - bear in mind that moderate drinkers outlive non-drinkers significantly. It is only when you start controlling for a lot of other factors that you can produce a result showing the harmful impact).

The research is new enough and still developing so you can't possibly say with any confidence what the real risk/rewards are. But we do know that the previous surgeon general was planning on adding cigarette style cancer warnings to booze and Trump killed it, and now his administration is trying to pull a study linking booze to breast cancer, in favor of an industry backed study finding that alcohol has cardiovascular benefits. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/health/alcohol-drinking-hhs-report.html

Remember, the studies that find it has cardiovascular benefits are almost all backed by the industry. The research that is coming out is pretty consistent that cancer risk is real and claims of cardiovascular benefits are shaky. It's also notable that the definition of "moderate drinking" that *MAY* have a cardiovascular benefit (though again, stressing that seems less likely) is set at 2 drinks a day for men, and one for women, and even without discussing the cancer issue, there was a push from the scientific end of the conversation that it should be lowered to 1 for men and less than 1 for women (industry pushed back on those changes).

So, if there's any cardiovascular benefit, it's might be found in women who have less than a drink a day. Not exactly social lubrication levels of drinking, more like a small glass of wine with dinner, a few times a week.

If you're genuinely interested (and you should be since you seem interested in your health) read more about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/03/health/alcohol-surgeon-general-warning.html

"There is no question that heavy consumption is harmful. But supporters of moderate drinking — including makers of wine, beer and spirits, and some physicians and scientists — argue that a little alcohol each day may reduce cardiovascular disease, the No. 1 killer in the United States.

Newer scientific studies have criticized the methodology of earlier studies, however, and have challenged that view, which was once a consensus.

While most cancer deaths occur at drinking levels that exceed the current recommended dietary guidelines, the risk for cancers of the breast, the mouth and the throat may rise with consumption of as little as one drink a day, or even less, Dr. Murthy said on Friday.

Overall, one of every six breast cancer cases is attributable to alcohol consumption, Dr. Murthy said. More recent studies have also linked moderate alcohol consumption to certain forms of heart disease, including atrial fibrillation, a heart arrhythmia."

Here is a fact for you : moderate drinkers live, on average, longer than never-drinkers. So it is not simply an artifact of people giving up alcohol for health reasons.

Now, it may be true that if you control for enough other factors you can still tease out enough harm that on net it is negative, but it clearly indicates that the negative impact of moderate alcohol consumption is not huge.

No. Drinkers do not live longer. Why are you jumping through all these hoops to justify drinking? Just say you need the buzz or fix because you are weak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am optimizing the quality of my life, not the quantity. Fine wines add immeasurably to that quality. It also enhances socialization, which is extremely beneficial for health and happiness.

smoking is also fun and looks cool... it would enhance my life a ton if it was consequence free. But it's not.

grow up

I did smoke for a few years, but gave it up 30 years ago when I realized that the risk/reward ratio was so unfavorable. The risk/reward ratio with alcohol is very different. There are cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking that partially offset the cancer risk. And, as I mentioned, the social benefits are huge. Many of the best times of my life have involved alcohol, and I wouldn’t trade that for a few more years of life (if that is even the trade-off - bear in mind that moderate drinkers outlive non-drinkers significantly. It is only when you start controlling for a lot of other factors that you can produce a result showing the harmful impact).

The research is new enough and still developing so you can't possibly say with any confidence what the real risk/rewards are. But we do know that the previous surgeon general was planning on adding cigarette style cancer warnings to booze and Trump killed it, and now his administration is trying to pull a study linking booze to breast cancer, in favor of an industry backed study finding that alcohol has cardiovascular benefits. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/05/health/alcohol-drinking-hhs-report.html

Remember, the studies that find it has cardiovascular benefits are almost all backed by the industry. The research that is coming out is pretty consistent that cancer risk is real and claims of cardiovascular benefits are shaky. It's also notable that the definition of "moderate drinking" that *MAY* have a cardiovascular benefit (though again, stressing that seems less likely) is set at 2 drinks a day for men, and one for women, and even without discussing the cancer issue, there was a push from the scientific end of the conversation that it should be lowered to 1 for men and less than 1 for women (industry pushed back on those changes).

So, if there's any cardiovascular benefit, it's might be found in women who have less than a drink a day. Not exactly social lubrication levels of drinking, more like a small glass of wine with dinner, a few times a week.

If you're genuinely interested (and you should be since you seem interested in your health) read more about it: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/03/health/alcohol-surgeon-general-warning.html

"There is no question that heavy consumption is harmful. But supporters of moderate drinking — including makers of wine, beer and spirits, and some physicians and scientists — argue that a little alcohol each day may reduce cardiovascular disease, the No. 1 killer in the United States.

Newer scientific studies have criticized the methodology of earlier studies, however, and have challenged that view, which was once a consensus.

While most cancer deaths occur at drinking levels that exceed the current recommended dietary guidelines, the risk for cancers of the breast, the mouth and the throat may rise with consumption of as little as one drink a day, or even less, Dr. Murthy said on Friday.

Overall, one of every six breast cancer cases is attributable to alcohol consumption, Dr. Murthy said. More recent studies have also linked moderate alcohol consumption to certain forms of heart disease, including atrial fibrillation, a heart arrhythmia."

Here is a fact for you : moderate drinkers live, on average, longer than never-drinkers. So it is not simply an artifact of people giving up alcohol for health reasons.

Now, it may be true that if you control for enough other factors you can still tease out enough harm that on net it is negative, but it clearly indicates that the negative impact of moderate alcohol consumption is not huge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all the information about alcohol causing cancer, Parkinson’s, wrinkles, anxiety, why do you still drink it? What makes you risk your health? Does it make you feel so good that it’s worth the risks?

Do you go outside or eat grilled food? The sun, air pollution, and grill also increase your risk of cancer, wrinkles etc. The sun provides vitamin D and grilled meat provides low fat protein. Similarly, alcohol provides a social ritual that has brought people together for over millenia - even Jesus broke bread and had wine with apostles. BTW - strong community ties are demonstrated to have the biggest impact on health. Why would you forego the obvious?

Don't bring Jesus into this as an excuse for showing up to church with a hang over.

Part of the reason these Prohibitionist threads get a little tiresome are the strawman assertions that drinking equals drunkenness. There’s a lot of ground between an occasional glass of wine and a hangover.

Absolutely.

But the people who argue most aggressively that everyone should stop talking about the real health risks of drinking aren't arguing for an occasional glass of wine with a meal. They wax poetic about the social benefits and while I don't think most are advocating for binge drinking, it's pretty obvious they just want to have fun and get buzzed without someone nagging them about the health risks. Nobody REALLY thinks it's good for you, some people think that a small amount might be, kind of good for you, but the recommended amount to have health benefits is currently 2 drinks a day for men, and 1 for women, and that's the number set by industry lobbyists, the scientists who think there may be health benefits suggest 1 drink a day for men and less than 1 for women.

If you are genuinely advocating for the idea that 3x a week, we all have a glass of wine with dinner, I can get on board. But that's not what most of the Booze Crew here are talking about, are they?

In no way is drinking alcohol daily moderate. The few people I know who drink daily never stop at one drink.

I drink one glass of wine probably 5 nights a week. I don’t like the way two makes me feel, but one is a ritual I enjoy. My cell phone addiction feels wayyy more harmful to me than a glass of wine.

I’m in my late 40s, so I remember the media reports from the 80s touting the health benefits of a daily glass of red wine. Sure, those studies were mostly BS, but some of the new alarmist ones stating the opposite probably are, too. Moderation is key to pretty much everything.

Well, the new ones arent' "alarmist" they just say things that are alarming. And, the cool thing about actual scientific research is it can be evaluated and judged on whether it's BS. The recent ones about the links to cancer are standing up to review and are being taken seriously by medical professionals.

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day genetics is stronger than lifestyle. No matter how much you take care of yourself your genes will decide your future.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beer sales are in a free fall. The bourbon trend is dead. Wine is also in a free fall. Once boomers die off, alcohol sales will be in the grave. Notice the alcohol ads targeting Hispanics and urban blacks. Yuppy white people are sobering up.

Sidebar: I think the non-alcoholic sugary drinks are just as bad. Sugar bombs for $12. Total scam and super unhealthy.

The younger people are more sober - but they might be vaping some mj in it's place.

This. They’ve just replaced alcohol with weed and now they’re antisocial and weird. I’ll take a generation of young people out drinking in bars and spending time together over ones who are just sitting in their couches playing video games.

Same here! And what all the anti-alcohol sheep are too narrow-minded and easily manipulated to realize is where all these studies about the "new" risks of alcohol are coming from. Moderate drinking is no less safe than living life daily.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With all the information about alcohol causing cancer, Parkinson’s, wrinkles, anxiety, why do you still drink it? What makes you risk your health? Does it make you feel so good that it’s worth the risks?

Do you go outside or eat grilled food? The sun, air pollution, and grill also increase your risk of cancer, wrinkles etc. The sun provides vitamin D and grilled meat provides low fat protein. Similarly, alcohol provides a social ritual that has brought people together for over millenia - even Jesus broke bread and had wine with apostles. BTW - strong community ties are demonstrated to have the biggest impact on health. Why would you forego the obvious?

Don't bring Jesus into this as an excuse for showing up to church with a hang over.

Part of the reason these Prohibitionist threads get a little tiresome are the strawman assertions that drinking equals drunkenness. There’s a lot of ground between an occasional glass of wine and a hangover.

Absolutely.

But the people who argue most aggressively that everyone should stop talking about the real health risks of drinking aren't arguing for an occasional glass of wine with a meal. They wax poetic about the social benefits and while I don't think most are advocating for binge drinking, it's pretty obvious they just want to have fun and get buzzed without someone nagging them about the health risks. Nobody REALLY thinks it's good for you, some people think that a small amount might be, kind of good for you, but the recommended amount to have health benefits is currently 2 drinks a day for men, and 1 for women, and that's the number set by industry lobbyists, the scientists who think there may be health benefits suggest 1 drink a day for men and less than 1 for women.

If you are genuinely advocating for the idea that 3x a week, we all have a glass of wine with dinner, I can get on board. But that's not what most of the Booze Crew here are talking about, are they?

In no way is drinking alcohol daily moderate. The few people I know who drink daily never stop at one drink.

I drink one glass of wine probably 5 nights a week. I don’t like the way two makes me feel, but one is a ritual I enjoy. My cell phone addiction feels wayyy more harmful to me than a glass of wine.

I’m in my late 40s, so I remember the media reports from the 80s touting the health benefits of a daily glass of red wine. Sure, those studies were mostly BS, but some of the new alarmist ones stating the opposite probably are, too. Moderation is key to pretty much everything.