All cause mortality and the case for age specific alcohol consumption guidelines

At the bottom of the page:

~~ What is already known on this topic ~~

- It is unclear from existing evidence whether the protective effect of moderate alcohol consumption is both real and applicable to older populations

~~ What this study adds ~~

- When compared with self reported never drinkers, protective associations were largely limited to women drinkers aged 65 years or more

- Little to no protection was present in other age-sex groups

*

I'm not a woman over 65, and I doubt the majority of people on HN are either. The study is still useful, though, since it indicates what not to do for health promotion! Drink alcohol.

Edit: not much markdown works... boo.

"In summary, the study is grossly underpowered to convincingly prove a plausible protection, and they have committed the cardinal sin of saying that non-significance is the same as 'no effect' in a study lacking sufficient events, in this case, deaths in non-drinkers. Maybe epidemiological studies should include power calculations, which make sure there is a reasonable chance of detecting a plausible effect, and which became standard in clinical trials after too-small studies were being used to claim that drugs did not work."

http://understandinguncertainty.org/misleading-conclusions-a...

Looking through this study it becomes clear that any positive effects of alcohol consumption is probably based on wishful thinking rather than statistical evidence.

They do mention one important point: most studies consider non-drinkers a homogenous group. In this study, they show that a lot of the seemingly positive effect evaporates when former drinkers are removed from the study. I wonder what would happen if they also removed people from the study who don't drink alcohol because of health reasons.

I'd be interested in reading a study of drinking patterns beyond simple measurement of total consumption.

Every study I read measures volume over a time such number of units per week. But there is a difference between downing a bottle of wine in one hour every saturday night as opposed to a single glass every night. Perhaps a study based on peak blood alcohol level during the week rather than total consumption?

The OP study seems to have dealt with older people. Retirees, without jobs, might have many 'average' days resulting in a steady daily drinking pattern. Most of the younger drinkers I know go for extended periods without drinking (weekdays) only to get hammered come the weekend. Is this worse? Maybe multi-day dry periods give your system a rest and that is better than a daily pattern? I don't know.

It's all moot to me. I don't drink, which for a non-muslim non-mormon canadian means people often think I'm a recovering alcoholic. I'm not. I just don't like drinking. It;s not fun.

So 20 units per week is about 0.5L of scotch. I drink about that much, or even a bit less, and most people think i am a drinker. Is that level of consumption actually safe?

"Two samples were used, each utilising a different variable for alcohol usage: self reported average weekly consumption over the past year and self reported consumption on the heaviest day in the past week"

I started to question the study a when I saw self reported.

I would really like to get to the bottom of this is # of drinks a day and health. What is the true number of drinks/day that cause damage? I vaguely remember Checholvakia study that made the partipiciants bring back the cork, so the researchers knew they drank the alcohol, and didn't sell the bottles. But even then--they could have poured out the liquor? I gave a weird feeling no drinks/day is best? I should be dead--yes--antidotal.

Direct healthcare costs estimated to account for £3.5bn by 2011-12 ($4.1bn; €3.6bn) of annual National Health Service expenditure in England.

Meanwhile :

Health problems associated with being overweight or obese cost the NHS more than £5 billion every year. [1]

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/reducing-obesity-and-...

A little off topic, but their site makes it really hard to figure out what BMJ stands for. I clicked around until I saw a picture of an old medical journal with "British Medical Journal" on the spine. On the ten or so pages I tried, that phrase never appears.

Basically, though, it's at the point of debating positive effects (if any) of drinking alcohol. Because there is no evidence of a negative effect.

For most Americans, I believe this concept: that drinking probably is not bad for you, would be considered pretty radical.

So the TLDR is if youre >= 65, decrease alcohol consumption. If you're <65 optimal range is 15-20 units per week, better if it's even consumption per day.

"One unit of alcohol is about equal to: half a pint of ordinary strength beer, lager or cider (3-4% alcohol by volume); or. a small pub measure (25 ml) of spirits (40% alcohol by volume); or. a standard pub measure (50 ml) of fortified wine such as sherry or port (20% alcohol by volume)"[1]

So in short: have 2 weak pints of beer xor 1 strong pint of beer xor 150ml of 13% wine.

Can someone confirm,refute this understanding of the text.

[1]:http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Recommended-Safe-Limits-of-A...

I'm sorry, but this is one research result I won't drink to.