this post was submitted on 04 May 2026
67 points (94.7% liked)

science

27010 readers
388 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

lemmy.world rules

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

How little? Doesn't the human body make small quantities itself?

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The article is the most misleading bullshit ever. It’s based on “low-risk” as the threshold for the population in the research.

[–] loppy@fedia.io 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That is literally the entire point of the study. How is that misleading?

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A little alcohol is too broad. It's intentionally misleading by being vague.

[–] loppy@fedia.io 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The very first sentence is

A new study examined the impact of alcohol consumption in healthy adults who did not report drinking more than the accepted ‘low-risk’ alcohol limits.

Which makes it very clear that by "little" in the title (they do not say "little" in the article) they mean "below the low-risk limit", and that "low-risk" is a technically defined term. Here is also the very first sentence of the abstract of the paper which the article is about, which they link to and is free to read:

Low-level alcohol consumption at or below current guidelines (≤1 standard drink equivalent/day for females, ≤2 standard drink equivalents/day for males)

What more do you want?

[–] R00bot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

2 drinks a day is a lot of alcohol imo. I'd love a study that looks at more normal amounts of alcohol (imo being less than 0.5 drinks a day on average)

[–] loppy@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think one of the main points of this study is exactly to show that studying such smaller quantities would be worthwhile and could have tangible health implications

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

They are addressing a common myth that a small amount of alcohol has health benefits, which has always been bullshit junk science promoted by beer and wine industry and european culture.

It was true 250 years ago in the time of cholera, when it was safer to drink weak ales than local water supplies.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Yeah I have 1-3 drinks per week.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

but some governments call this a safe level.

Canada, updated in 2023 but was 2x this before:

0 drinks/week: No risk; better health and sleep.

1–2 drinks/week: Low risk; likely to avoid alcohol-related consequences.

3–6 drinks/week: Moderate risk; increased risk of developing several types of cancer.

7+ drinks/week: Increasingly high risk of heart disease or stroke.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

These articles trigger drinkers.

[–] Redditsux@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

They studied people who were having 2 drinks or less per day. The higher the lifetime consumption of alcohol the lower the cerebral blood flow especially in older age.