"We observed a relatively small difference in life expectancies across different levels of alcohol consumption compared with other individual lifestyle factors. The cardiovascular benefits of moderate alcohol consumption have been consistently observed in large cohort studies, but alcohol consumption and risk of cancer showed a dose-response relation. Thus, current guidelines do not encourage a non-alcohol drinker to start drinking just for the benefit of preventing cardiovascular disease."
In the US daily drinking seems to be seen as bad (perhaps a legacy of prohibition?) while binge drinking once a week doesn't seem to be seen as particularly problematic.
https://drinksfeed.com/think-you-drink-a-lot-this-chart-will...
We can work towards drinking from two directions: self report consumption and alcohol sales ought to lead to the same number. Not perfectly of course - drinks get thrown away, saved as gifts, used to cook, and so on. But last I looked, the ratio of drinks sold to drinking reported in the US was two to one. (I'd love to see the same data for other countries.)
So either people understating their drinking by a huge amount, or the studies are undersampling groups that do a lot of drinking. Probably both. We can make some good guesses: minors probably don't admit to their drinking, teetotalers probably self-report more accurately than occasional drinkers, and so on. But it's a gap so big that it's hard to talk confidently about what people here are doing.
"Drinking every night" = "[at least] 1 beer / night" in the minds of people who associate drinking with beer. There's no such thing as consuming a small glass of beer as it's not really a beverage you savour.
I doubt your claim that this sort of beer savouring is "common in US bars" (or if it is commonly available, I doubt that it is commonly ordered).
To put it another way, compare the amount of alcohol ingested on an average evening where beer was the primary beverage vs. an average evening where wine was the primary beverage.
I don't have data to back this up and it's not like I drink heavily myself, but my instinct and experience tells me alcohol-for-wine consumption is much lower than beer's, and so it is in most people's minds.
I don't understand what you mean.
Public Health advice on alcohol in the UK has been pretty consistent for many years. There are 3 changes: the limits for men went from 21 units a week to 14 units a week; the advice to pregnant women to avoid all alcohol became stronger; and the advice about not allowing under 18s to drink alcohol became stronger.
In 1987 the advice was pretty close to what it is today.
http://www.ias.org.uk/uploads/pdf/Consumption%20docs/A%20bri...
We don't know if there's a safe limit
men should drink no more than 21 units per week
women should drink no more than 14 units per week
both men and women should have 2 to 3 days drink free
the total number of weekly units should not be drunk in 1 or 2 bouts.
> The most significant change to the Government guidelines was the move from weekly limits to daily limits.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmsc...
1. Drinks per week, eg 14 drinks/week
2. Average drinks per day, eg 4 drinks/day
If you drink your entire drinks per week in a day, that's really bad. If you drink your average drinks per day, every day, that's also bad.
For others who might be reading this: You should have some days (ideally a majority) in which you don't drink at all, some days in which you drink at or below the daily guideline, and you probably aren't all the worse off if you occasionally exceed the daily average guideline.
also collected alcoholic beverage consumption, including red and white wine separately (4 ounces, increasing to 5 ounces in 2006), beer (one glass, can, or bottle), and liquor (one drink or shot). We multiplied the amount of alcohol in grams per specified portion size by servings per day, determined the midpoint of the frequency category, and summed across all beverages to estimate the average alcohol consumption (g/day). We defined moderate alcohol consumption as 5-15 g/day for women and 5-30 g/day for men
Surely it cannot be 4 bottles of beer daily (or 4*7 bottles on weekend).
A bottle of beer is usually 330ml so 1.3 units, so moderate drinking would be defined as up to 2 pints or 3 bottles of 4% beer daily.
> A unit of alcohol is 8g or 10ml of pure alcohol, which is about:
> half a pint of lower to normal-strength lager/beer/cider (ABV 3.6%) > a single small shot measure (25ml) of spirits (25ml, ABV 40%)
So a 12oz bottle (.75 pint) of 3.6% beer would be 1.5 NHS units. A bottle of 7.2% stout would be 3 units. A full 4 units per day would require a bottle of strong 9.6% beer, or two bottles of a 4.8%.
While less eye-popping than four bottles a day, that still seems like a lot of drinking to me, especially if concentrated around a few days. That's 14 bottles of 4.8% beer per week, so imagine four beers on a Wednesday, seven on Friday night, and another three over the weekend after the hangover's worn off – week after week. That seems like it would have to have a health impact, and it's surprising to see it as the limit for "moderate" drinking.
That being said, I don't drink, so I don't know for certainly what is culturally acceptable, I'm just going based on observations (lunches and dinners with coworkers and whatnot). However, this seems like it could be used to justify poor behavior, especially for health conscious individuals who like to check off boxes.
So, a 250 ml glass of wine at 12% ABV is 0.25 * 12 = 3 units.
In the past when units were created wine was about 8% ABV, and a serving size was about 125 ml, which gives 0.125 * 8 = 1 unit per glass. When you see advice saying "one small glass of wine is about 1 unit" it's a bit misleading, because currently in the UK one small glass is going to be about 175 ml, and the ABV is going to be about 12%, which gives about 2 units per glass.
I'd rather have the work out, good meal, hydrate, and get good sleep. It's obvious that good habits snowball into more good habits, while bad habits snowball into more bad habits.
i think it's funny that having a good (if not optimally healthy) time would be so ridiculed, but maybe that's just me. FWIW i know a lot of people who work out at 4:30am in order to gain that time for after work social activities which often include alcohol, so not mutually exclusive.
The secret of junk foot is that junk food makes your mouth feel good for 20mminutes, but healthy food makes your body feel good all day, and gives you an energy level to live more actively.
> Bar food with your beer and maybe a pizza?
> don't let that one beer turn in to a good time!
Personally, I prefer to enjoy the social benefits of going out without the consequences of alcohol or "bar food." I accept people's drug habits - it's fine to consume drugs responsibly (alcohol included). For me, I am able to have a good time and "let loose" without being under the influence of drugs.
There's nothing wrong with being sober. You can still participate in the local economy, engage in social events, and live a healthy life without fitting the routine you described of going to the bar and hitting the gym.
Anyways, my point of saying this is that I wonder if alcohol for most people increases their life expectancy because it lets them socialize more. In the same way that people buy essential oils and it has a placebo effect on the that make them feel better, I think the bar scene has the same effect on many Americans.
My social experience is that people are mentally unable to "let loose" and socialize without the aide of drugs.
I'm simply saying there's a real opportunity cost which is directly in context with the comment I'm replying to. Sorry you interpreted it differently.
Simply put, if you're out drinking, you're not in the gym or doing another activity that has more health benefits. Don't let that stop you from 'having a good time', but it's something to keep in mind when we talk about the health effects of having a couple drinks everyday.
It's possible drinking impacts their self reports :-)
That said, the individual-factor breakdown really did find that at low doses, rising alcohol consumption correlated with improved health. Undoubtedly some healthy-user bias between no and light drinking, but it's a pretty smooth curve through moderate consumption.
Of course I'm not implying that alcohol is in any way healthy, but it's probably healthier to have great drunk moments with your friends once in a while than it is to be lonely and not drink. It's important to note that you certainly can be social without alcohol though.
From the conclusion: "Our results show that the safest level of drinking is none."
Which I'm really not convinced that is even true.
Sharing a bottle of wine or champagne with my wife can be one of the most enjoyable experiences to us.. going out to the pub having some beer with family & friends is great.
An argument could be "you can have just as much fun doing something else", but I don't know.. that's not really my experience. A moderate amount of drinking usually makes things even more fun.
it may be that the act of consuming alcohol is a confounding variable in the underlying correlation of social interaction/un-stressing or something.
From the study text:
> We observed a relatively small difference in life expectancies across different levels of alcohol consumption compared with other individual lifestyle factors. The cardiovascular benefits of moderate alcohol consumption have been consistently observed in large cohort studies, but alcohol consumption and risk of cancer showed a dose-response relation. Thus, current guidelines do not encourage a non-alcohol drinker to start drinking just for the benefit of preventing cardiovascular disease.
Female life expectancy peaks in the two lowest non-zero ranges, and disease-free expectancy at the second-lowest specifically; male life expectancy rises all the way to the top of "moderate" consumption, and disease-free peaks at the top two "moderate" doses. Presumably that's partly from men being larger and metabolizing alcohol faster, and partly from men being at higher risk of heart disease.
(There's probably a healthy-user bias here too, since there are conditions and medications which weren't checked for that would make people unable to tolerate alcohol, but that's less relevant when comparing different doses.)
Or, to put a cynical spin on it: noone becomes an abstinent by choice, usually people stop drinking once their doctor tells them they should, so obviously they will have worse overall health than moderate drinkers.
(Incredibly to me, even small doses of radiation can be protective against larger doses later.)
1. The social benefit. There's research showing that if you have a rich social life and friend network, you live longer. The assumption being that the drink is likely to be with other people.
2. The stress management benefit. It's not healthy to be stressed out. The alcohol's mitigating effect on stress may be greater than the alcohol's poisonous effect, in the right dose, for the right person.
The one thing I don't like about drinking is that it's basically a cheat code. It makes mundane stuff fun, if it were removed as an option, then maybe I would try other stuff and live a more interesting life.
These figures are not absolute. Other studies consider someone an alcoholic as soon as there is a craving for alcohol. The risk is higher for someone who drinks daily.
Standards of what is acceptable also vary from country to country.