The most important statistic mentioned is light drinkers have a reduction in all-cause mortality compared to non-drinkers. While heavy drinkers or binge drinkers have an increase.

It's a critical statistic that all of these sensationalist headlines fail to account for or even analyze.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 1 points 27 minutes ago

I think that's not because of alcohol - I am a light drinker (3 a week, or less) now and it's because my life is better and I am healthier and not as stressed or poor. I can drink not daily because I'm not an addictive sort of person. Yeah my health is better now than the years I didn't drink but it's because I have more money, can get medical care, have time to exercise too, all the benefits of the easier lifestyle we finally reached.

I don't think it's so harmful, nor helpful, always take July & December as dry months and see no difference in how I feel.

I know that's anecdotal, but unless they are controlling for income and overall lifestyle, my guess is that light drinking is an indication of a healthy moderate sort of lifestyle not an actual healthy factor in one.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 4 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

IIRC that effect is more a result of bad categorization rather than light alcohol use actually being correlated with lower mortality.

People who used to be heavy drinkers and who have since quit get put in the "non drinkere" category, but because they used to drink heavily their mortality is still impacted even after they stop. You don't suddenly get a good liver after 10 years of tearing it apart after all.

So the "non-drinkers" category has an artificially worse mortality than the occasional drinkers.

At the end of the day the body breaks alcohol down into some carcinogens. No amount of that is good for you.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world -1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

It's a decent argument but it's not supported in the data.

Now I am going to have to dig up that study from China. They had a sample size of over 1 million people with repeated blood draws, medical history and a full alcohol use history. It showed the same all-mortality curve for non-drinkers (never consumed) versus light drinkers.

What's interesting is heavy drinkers who quit reverted back close to the never consumed level after like 5 years.

I swear I had it saved to my zotero account but I can't find it. I will keep looking.

Bottom line: ethanol under the right dosage reduces cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The amount of reduction more than compensates for its risks of creating other diseases like cancer. However the negative effects of over-consumption make it unethical for any medical professional to recommend non-drinkers to start drinking. If you choose to drink, 1-2 drinks per day depending on sex and weight is the hard limit.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

2 drinks a day is a heavy drinker.

The blood thinning effect of alcohol has been dismissed by several studies, it's a cause of many types of heart disease. The problem is people lie about intake, and the teetotlers and typically ex alcoholics.

Ethanol is a toxin, it effects mitochondrial efficiency at incredibly low levels. Huge risk factor for dementia.

Also be careful of regional studies like the large Chinese cohort because a lot of effects are due to genetics. Bad epidemiology had people convinced fish oil would would prevent heart disease because of one study in inuit that failed to consider genetics.

There is no safe amount of alcohol.

https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-alcohol-consumption-is-safe-for-our-health

[–] The_v@lemmy.world -1 points 3 hours ago

Speaking of terrible studies. The one you linked is absolutely terrible.

Have you read of the actual paper. Their conclusions are absolutely not supported by the evidence and their methodology is statistically invalid.