The U.S. public health establishment buries overwhelming evidence that abstinence is a cause of heart disease and early death. People deserve to know that alcohol gives most of us a higher life expectancy—even if consumed above recommended limits.
Honestly, I was kind of wondering that myself. The author never really addressed exactly what the mechanism was for these supposed health benefits, which were not very well detailed either. He seemed to imply that it was particularly good for your brain and heart (and overall mortality), without much explanation as to how it was providing those benefits: . . . Epidemiological study after study (that is, research tracing drinkers, their consumption, and their life outcomes) produces consistent findings—there are now hundreds of such studies. But whenever any sort of research can be teased out to suggest drinking is bad for you, it will be put on full display to confuse the picture. . . . Given the multitude of studies of the effects of alcohol on mortality (since heart disease is the leading killer of men and women, drinking reduces overall mortality significantly), meta-analyses combining the results of the best-designed such studies can be generated. In 2006, the Archives of Internal Medicine, an American Medical Association journal, published an analysis based on 34 well-designed prospective studies—that is, research which follows subjects for years, even decades. This meta-analysis, incorporating a million subjects, found that “1 to 2 drinks per day for women and 2 to 4 drinks per day for men are inversely associated with total mortality.” By the end I felt ready to go have a drink right then, but I can't say I know exactly why it would be good for me!Flash forward to 2011, when the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans were finally released by the Department of Agriculture and HHS. One reason for their delayed publication was the uproar raised by public health organizations to the Guidelines’ alcohol committee’s report of “strong evidence” that moderate drinking prevents heart disease, and the “moderate evidence” that it prevents dementia.
He also mentions a study by the American Cancer Society which apparently has some interesting findings: "The overall death rates were lowest among men and women reporting about one drink daily. Mortality from all causes increased with heavier drinking, particularly among adults under age 60 with lower risk of cardiovascular disease." This seems to say, “Never have more than a drink a day—or you’re doomed!” But the value of this study’s huge number of subjects is that it is possible to reliably identify death rates during follow-up for people drinking up to six or more drinks daily. These results are laid out by this graphic in the New England Journal of Medicine: His article is certainly not a scientific journal, but there does seem to be something going on here, if the results of that study are to be believed. Perhaps someone with more experience can shed light on it. He is careful to note that there does seem to be a difference between regular drinking and binge drinking, though. It also said that this article orginally appeared on Substance which I've never heard of. Edit: The original article has 11 comments expressing a variety of responses, including a reply to one of them by the author. He has written books about addiction, although none of which I've read, so I can't say I know much about him. In the largest prospective study ever conducted for alcohol, involving nearly a half million subjects, sponsored by the American Cancer Society (need I say, an organization not regarded as an alcohol industry stooge), Michael Thun (famed for his anti-smoking investigations) and colleagues examined all causes of death related to drinking among middle-age and elderly subjects. As in all such similar studies, this research is the best available to us other than controlled, randomized studies—it follows people forward in time and statistically controls for all identifiable confounding variables. Here is Thun et al.’s summary of their findings:
https://hubski.com/pub?id=158872 Psychology says sex is good for us! Since when have psychologists been allowed to say shit in public again?
Me too. It's rare that I don't feel magnitudes of better after two drinks. Even when I have a cold or some other ailment, the right drink can really help.
From personal experience, I have to call bullshit on this... at least for myself. Ever since I've gone cold turkey on alcohol, I've been the most healthy since my teens. I used to get sick with each change of the season and occasional bouts with mild colds and what not. I am happy to report that I am no longer getting sick with each change of the season nor the occasional bouts. Come to think of it, I don't even remember the last time I was afflicted with anything (knocking on wood). Heck, I don't even have my allergies anymore. I do know if I can attribute all of it to the absence of alcohol because I also started exercising regularly at the same time, but I am certain that the absence of alcohol helped.
This is exactly why scientists study populations, not persons. Alcohol might adversely affect you, but it apparently benefits the majority of others. And as you indicated, there were uncontrolled variables in your experiment. :) Glad that you are feeling better in general, whatever the cause!
As someone who consumes "above the recommended limits" I always enjoy reading about these studies. Our bodies can take an incredible amount of damage and I think we need a little of that to innoculate ourselves and become stronger physiologically. Everything in moderation of course.