There are no safe levels of Alcohol consumption ....

[Yellow Fang]

I came across something about alcohol and cancer today in a book I am reading, Becoming Vegan by Brenda Davis and Vesanto Melina:

Evidence suggests that diet is the linchpin, accounting for an estimated 30 to 35 percent of all cancers. Beyond food choices, an estimated 25 to 30 percent of cancers (87 per cent of lung cancers) are primarily due to smoking, 15 to 20 percent are linked to infections, 10 to 20 percent are triggered by obesity, and 4 to 6 percent are tied to alcohol ingestion. The balance is thought to be caused by a variety of factors, such as radiation, stress, inadequate physical activity, and environmental contaminants.
: : : :
Alcoholic Drinks Limit alcoholic drinks. If alcoholic drinks are consumed, limit consumption to no more than two drinks a day for men and one drink a day for women. There is convincing evidence that alcohol increases the risk of mouth, pharynx, esophageal, bowel (men), and breast cancers. Alcohol also probably increases the risk of liver cancer and bowel cancer in women. The evidence suggests that all types of alcoholic beverages are implicated and that there is no safe level of intake. Based solely on cancer data, alcohol should be completely avoided.
With its ability to act as a solvent, alcohol has the potential to ease the entrance of carcinogens into cells. Alcohol also produces reactive metabolites, such as acetaldehyde, and generates free radicals. Worse, alcohol and tobacco act synergistically to increase cancer risk. The body's ability to repair genetic mutations caused by tobacco is blunted by alcohol.

The book also quotes some expert comparing the no safe limit for red meat to there being no safe limit for radiation. The risk depends on frequency and intensity. I suppose that's what they mean about there being no safe limit for alcohol.

 

[Flick of the Elbow]

I read recently the advice being pushed by some 'health expert' that ideally the only thing we should be drinking is water. That's the puritanical world that these people inhabit.

 

[FrankCrank]

...had a 'proper' session 2 days ago, and still paying he price - not feeling 100% for sure. Did the hackneyed 'never again' stuff, but what the hey, when you get into company with your drinking head on caution is quickly forgotten. Finding it hard to believe meat pies are bad for you, first thing I do back there is buy cheese, wine and a pork pie to stave off those hunger pangs....yummy...

 

[Arrowfoot]

And it's a slightly rhetorical question in that I don't really expect anyone here to be able to say categorically that it is or isn't accurate, just don't want to be debating about what a piece of text does or doesn't say (may as well start a bible study group for that) when my issue is whether the research, or at least the analysis and conclusions drawn from the research is right.

I've come across the term 'pseudo-debunking' today, which offers a lovely balance to the concept of pseudo science. Knowing which sciency sounding version of the 'truth' to believe feels nigh on impossible without spending a lot of time researching and learning about it yourself....

There is nothing psuedo about alcohol intake impacting a section of the population, causing significant damage to family, loved ones and others in society. There is a reason why breathlyser tests are done along roads and no test is given for taking excessive sugar or wearing excessively high heels. There is a reason why pilots caught drinking prior to a flight are sacked. Nearly every organisation and vocation requires or prefers that you do not turn up to work smelling of alcohol. Young lifes have been lost because someone exceeded consumption ( no necessarily a drunk or even a regular drinker)

Again not calling for prohibition but the consequence management and early education on its dangers is less than robust. I think the jury is out about pseudo science regarding chocolate, full cream milks, eggs in regard to health due to the frequent flip flops but frankly this is the first time I am hearing about pseudo science and alcohol. Is there a study that suggest that alcohol does not impair an individual compared to when that individual has not consumped. I know when I had a couple of pints, I am happy as hell but I also know I am not in the right condition to drive science or no science.

 

[Arrowfoot]

I read recently the advice being pushed by some 'health expert' that ideally the only thing we should be drinking is water. That's the puritanical world that these people inhabit.

Regular intake of red wine reduces cholestrol. I hate to attend a party or function where no alcohol is served. The only thing that will save a party in such a case is a proper stand up comedian.

 

[srw]

I came across something about alcohol and cancer today in a book I am reading, Becoming Vegan by Brenda Davis and Vesanto Melina:

Evidence suggests that diet is the linchpin, accounting for an estimated 30 to 35 percent of all cancers. Beyond food choices, an estimated 25 to 30 percent of cancers (87 per cent of lung cancers) are primarily due to smoking, 15 to 20 percent are linked to infections, 10 to 20 percent are triggered by obesity, and 4 to 6 percent are tied to alcohol ingestion. The balance is thought to be caused by a variety of factors, such as radiation, stress, inadequate physical activity, and environmental contaminants.
: : : :
Alcoholic Drinks Limit alcoholic drinks. If alcoholic drinks are consumed, limit consumption to no more than two drinks a day for men and one drink a day for women. There is convincing evidence that alcohol increases the risk of mouth, pharynx, esophageal, bowel (men), and breast cancers. Alcohol also probably increases the risk of liver cancer and bowel cancer in women. The evidence suggests that all types of alcoholic beverages are implicated and that there is no safe level of intake. Based solely on cancer data, alcohol should be completely avoided.
With its ability to act as a solvent, alcohol has the potential to ease the entrance of carcinogens into cells. Alcohol also produces reactive metabolites, such as acetaldehyde, and generates free radicals. Worse, alcohol and tobacco act synergistically to increase cancer risk. The body's ability to repair genetic mutations caused by tobacco is blunted by alcohol.

The book also quotes some expert comparing the no safe limit for red meat to there being no safe limit for radiation. The risk depends on frequency and intensity. I suppose that's what they mean about there being no safe limit for alcohol.

As I understand it they're plumb wrong. The overwhelmingly largest risk factor for cancer is getting older.

 

[Chromatic]

I came across something about alcohol and cancer today in a book I am reading, Becoming Vegan by Brenda Davis and Vesanto Melina:

Evidence suggests that diet is the linchpin, accounting for an estimated 30 to 35 percent of all cancers. Beyond food choices, an estimated 25 to 30 percent of cancers (87 per cent of lung cancers) are primarily due to smoking, 15 to 20 percent are linked to infections, 10 to 20 percent are triggered by obesity, and 4 to 6 percent are tied to alcohol ingestion. The balance is thought to be caused by a variety of factors, such as radiation, stress, inadequate physical activity, and environmental contaminants.
: : : :
Alcoholic Drinks Limit alcoholic drinks. If alcoholic drinks are consumed, limit consumption to no more than two drinks a day for men and one drink a day for women. There is convincing evidence that alcohol increases the risk of mouth, pharynx, esophageal, bowel (men), and breast cancers. Alcohol also probably increases the risk of liver cancer and bowel cancer in women. The evidence suggests that all types of alcoholic beverages are implicated and that there is no safe level of intake. Based solely on cancer data, alcohol should be completely avoided.
With its ability to act as a solvent, alcohol has the potential to ease the entrance of carcinogens into cells. Alcohol also produces reactive metabolites, such as acetaldehyde, and generates free radicals. Worse, alcohol and tobacco act synergistically to increase cancer risk. The body's ability to repair genetic mutations caused by tobacco is blunted by alcohol.

The book also quotes some expert comparing the no safe limit for red meat to there being no safe limit for radiation. The risk depends on frequency and intensity. I suppose that's what they mean about there being no safe limit for alcohol.

I read recently the advice being pushed by some 'health expert' that ideally the only thing we should be drinking is water. That's the puritanical world that these people inhabit.

What about water's ability to act as a solvent???????? We're doomed!

 

[SD1]

My figure isn't exact but based on my extensive experience.
.

So guesswork then.

 

[Wafer]

There is nothing psuedo about alcohol intake impacting a section of the population, causing significant damage to family, loved ones and others in society. There is a reason why breathlyser tests are done along roads and no test is given for taking excessive sugar or wearing excessively high heels. There is a reason why pilots caught drinking prior to a flight are sacked. Nearly every organisation and vocation requires or prefers that you do not turn up to work smelling of alcohol. Young lifes have been lost because someone exceeded consumption ( no necessarily a drunk or even a regular drinker)

Indeed, though none of that has any relation to the research which led to these new guidelines.

 

[SD1]

I

To clarify if it helps you, I don't mean to say that 85% of night shift calls are caused by alcohol, but that 85% involve alcohol. I include everything from drunken assaults, people sleeping in the streets, falls where the person who has fallen is intoxicated, panic attacks, overdoses and mental health problems exacerbated by alcohol, to chest pains etc where alcohol has been consumed.

Like to blame a lot on alcohol don't you/NHS. Anything or everything. Who correlated your statistics. Did you make a note every night? You have absolutely no idea what the statistics are, you have made them up.

 

[Markymark]

Yep... the thing most likely to kill you is living...

I'm immortal and haven't been proven wrong yet.

 

[Fab Foodie]

As I understand it they're plumb wrong. The overwhelmingly largest risk factor for cancer is getting older.

The obvious difference is that getting older is not exactly a lifestyle choice, it's a given .... whereas smoking, drinking, diet etc are and can be influenced to reduce minimise the risks.

 

[fossyant]

Nothing is good for you.

I shall carry on cycling/exercising as it's good for my health and I can be a little naughty.

I haven't touched a drop in 7 weeks (obviously being in hospital) but I tried to drink a tiny glass of Port with Cheese and crackers the other day, and I couldn't - I'd normally knock it back. Found it too strong ?

 

[SD1]

I'm immortal and haven't been proven wrong yet.

You may have added a t by mistake. immoral?!

 

[SD1]

The NHS keeps quite good statistics on the prevalence of alcohol use in those attending A&E and elective admissions. It's been a standard data item for a number of years.

He appears to be giving his personal statistics not the NHS ones.