Facts and Research on Alcohol - Is it "healthy" to drink?

[aspie_and_proud]

Addiction aside, what is everyone's take on alcohol? I did a search and didn't really get any answers as to whether it is healthy (on here). I have heard that WINE in moderation is okay (and seen research), healthy even, but most people my age aren't really drinking wine. They drink beer and other harder alcohols. I even have a friend who is in college studying nutrition as his major (? I think that is what it is called) and he says that he learned two drinks a day is "good for you." I asked him to specify and he said the two drinks could be a glass of wine, 12 oz beer, or a shot of 80 proof alcohol. I don't know if this is actually correct, but to me that sounds like B and S. I don't think ANYONE should be drinking two servings of alcohol PER DAY. MAYBE a week, but certainly NOT per day. I have NEVER heard that anything besides wine is healthy for you and I could be wrong, but to me this doesn't sound right at all. Maybe my definition of "moderation" is a bit different, but when I think moderation, I think weekly (when it comes to generally unhealthy stuff). And again, that mindset is how I look at wine, NOT harder alcohols and beer, but especially harder alcohols.

So what does the research and facts say? Opinions welcome, of course.

[MysticTree]

I can't point you in the direction of evidence but if red wine is as good for you as some people say then drink red grape juice and reap even more benefits! I think two servings a week isn't too clever either btw.

[Arky]

I .... have a friend who .... says that he learned two drinks a day is "good for you." I asked him to specify and he said the two drinks could be a glass of wine, 12 oz beer, or a shot of 80 proof alcohol. I don't know if this is actually correct, but to me that sounds like B and S. I don't think ANYONE should be drinking two servings of alcohol PER DAY. MAYBE a week, but certainly NOT per day. I have NEVER heard that anything besides wine is healthy for you and I could be wrong, but to me this doesn't sound right at all.

This is a potentially very devisive (and contentious) question, but then I'm sure you're aware of that! ;-)

Certainly, there is some misguided extrapolation of logic evident in what you quoted (I'm not saying you are misguided, just some of what you quoted, and I do appreciate that that may have partially arisen out of an intention to be succinct).

The "two drinks a day is 'good for you'" sentiment arises from statistical analysis of various population studies including measures of condition-delineated mortality rates. I view such studies with an open mind but don't give them any more than approximately 2/3rds credence, since there are so many potential confounding variables not taken account of by such statistical studies.

Where I most take issue with the apparent train of logic, quoted above, is the assumption that two seperate things can be simply concatenated together and maintain their supposed accuracy (note that I'm not aiming this at you, personally; I'm just discussing the quote itself):

"two drinks a day is 'good for you' "

"two drinks could be a glass of wine, 12 oz beer, or a shot of 80 proof alcohol"

Even if the first (extremely flawed) statement were to be considered as an 'absolute fact' (discussion on which, further down this post)

and

Even if a glass of wine, 12 oz beer, or a shot of 80 proof alcohol contain equivalent levels of alcohol

it still does not mean that 2 drinks of 80 proff alcohol have the same (positive or negative) effect upon the body as 2 drinks of wine or 2 drinks of beer.
Therefore, such a broad, sweeping, statement would be something of an insult to the studies upon which the original conclusions may have been based, as it glosses over important contextual details and measures

Speaking, just for a moment, from a broad 'generic alcohol' standpoint, though, there is some (tentative) evidence that alcohol can exert an anti-coagulatory effect upon blood platelets (but because the effect seems more strongly associated with female participants, it suggests an unidentified confounding variable). Similar effects can be seen to occur when one consumes foods such as garlic, and this is one reason, amongst many others, why garlic is so revered, from a health standpoint, in an effort to maintain good cardiovascular function. Of course, in the case of alcoholic drinks such as wine, such an anti-coagulatory effect may additionally be influenced by it's other constituents, but my point here is to concede that, as much as I object to the discussion of 'alcohol' in non-specific, generic terms, an anti-coagulatory effect might nontheless be a generic property of generic alcohol. Maybe.

http://www.nature.com/nsu/000511/000511-4.html


There is a temptation for those who enjoy alcohol to seek to justify their intake (not that they necessarily must justify it, but some do feel obliged, for social reasons or due to addictive issues etc.), and thus any 'study' hailing 'positive benefits' to alcohol consumption may tend to be grasped-at for the purposes of justifying their intake. But it is absurd for such a person to sit down with a pint of beer, in their local bar, and read a brief paragraph in a tabloid newspaper, claiming a certain amount of daily alcohol intake has been found to be associated with desirable mortality rates, if it turns out that the study was based upon wine consumption rather than beer consumption (many studies based upon consumption of wine by the French populace and their so-called 'paradoxically' low levels of cardiovascular disease, in spite of relatively abundant consumption of dietary fats, for example)

Furthermore, just as with pharmaceutical research (and GMO research), one should always keep in mind that although there are some researchers who simply take a genuine intellectual interest in a topic such as alcohol consumption, for the most part it costs money to undertake research and thus funding will be necessary, and whoever provides the funding must have some motive leading them to hand over their money.

For example:

There is a huge, huge amount of money in the brewing industry. They would probably like to see studies encouraging people to consume more, since it would increase the profitability of their industry.

But there are also charities dealing with alcohol addiction, which, potentially, may feel motivated to fund studies which 'discover' that alcohol has deleterious health effects, even in small quantities. I'm only using this as an example, not stating it as a fact.

The government gains from alcohol consumption, in terms of tax/duty income, which can total hundreds of millions of pounds/dollars, so (arguably) they might have a vested interest in surreptitiously promoting alcohol consumption to citizens via 'recommendations', 'guidelines', and/or 'new studies'. Conversely, however, alcohol consumption may cost the government many millions in social problems, road traffic incidents, healthcare costs etc etc., so even the conspiracy theorists don't have it all their own way, when seeking to point accusatory fingers at the authorities...


So, for every possible 'dubious' reason for alcohol consumption being promoted in the public consciousness, there can be seen to be an equivalent positive reason for the subject being discussed. Therefore, it is perhaps unwise to conclude that just because there are sometimes dubious motives underlying the latest 'study' or 'government department of health recommendations', or syndicated media 'news story', that it must then be reasonable to conclude that alcohol is dubious as a whole. That's 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater', so-to-speak.

Unfortunately, we all, to varying degrees, like to keep our beliefs and opinions 'simple', leading to an almost 'binary' way of thinking.
To call wine 'alcohol' is like calling extra virgin olive oil 'oil'. Yes, wine does, of course, contain alcohol, and EVOO does contain fatty acids (oil), but their health effects do not necessarily pertain to these primary constituents, so to judge them based upon these apparently predominant constituents is short-sighted. There are tannins, anthocyanins, etc. in wine which are profoundly beneficial to the cardiovascular system (by which I don't just mean the heart but also the tiny blood vessels of the eyes etc. throughout the entire body), along with numerous other positive health benefits). Similarly, with EVOO, the vast majority of people are completely ignorant of the fact that although the predominant Omega 9 Oleic acid (18:1, n−9) content may, perhaps, exert positive health effects upon the human body (even though Oleic acid is currently not classified as an essential fatty acid), it is the minor constituents of the oil which may be exerting the most powerful and profound health effects. I no longer have his book, but I recall Udo Erasmus discussing that these minor constituents may be present as only a tiny percentage of EVOO.

2 drinks a day is a wildly over-simplified assertion. Stated in such over-simplified form, it takes no account of the associated constituents contained within each drink (some of which may have deleterious effects upon health, others protective effects), the speed of consumption (e.g. shot versus pint) etc. etc.

I sense that your question is driving at this point, too; that not all alcoholic drinks are equivalent in their health effects, and of course, you are spot-on in questioning this.

As a tongue-in-cheek, illustration of this point:

Personally, I have concluded that 2 emergency vehicles a day is healthy, but not 3. I know this to be a fact because, statistically, whenever I see 3 emergency vehicles a day, I have noticed that the 3rd one is always attending a particularly unpleasant incident. I assume it's irrelevant whether the emergency vehicle is police, fire, or ambulance! ;-)

[Arky]

I stopped drinking alcohol several years ago, but this was because I have liver issues relating to heavy metal intoxication, not because I take issue with moderate alcohol consumption. When my liver function finally improves, I may, or may not consider resuming alcohol consumption. It's something of a 'non-issue' for me, since I never crave alcohol, nor do I feel 'obliged' to consume it during social gatherings. If I ever resume alcohol consumption, though, it will undoubtedly be in the direction of red wine rather than any other type of alcoholic drink, because I know how many positive benefits there are to consuming red wine's minor constituents. For anyone wishing to benefit from these without consuming alcohol, one can eat grapes (especially those with seeds), or consume grapejuice. I'm not a fan of grapejuice, though, since it is absolutely loaded with fructose. One way around this issue would be to purchase wine instead, but pour small amounts of the wine into almost-boiling-hot water. This way, the majority of the alcohol will evaporate, leaving behind the healthy constituents of the wine. I used to make a large cup of green/white tea, and add in a slug of red wine, drinking the beverage after the alcohol had evaporated. This tea+wine combo tasted a little odd but I'm fine with that and it offers a fairly broad spectrum of flavanoids, polyphenols etc.

Beetroot, green/white tea, pine bark (pycnogenol), citrus pith (hesperidin etc.) hawthorn, yarrow, etc. are also rich sources of flavanoids, so there are many, many non-alcoholic options.

My best advice would be that if you consume alcohol because you enjoy it or like to share the experience socially, then simply consume it in moderation, ensure your diet is rich in protective compounds (milk-thistle, artichoke, chanca piedra, beetroot, green tea etc. are wonderfully protective of the liver, for example), and (ideally) choose alcoholic drinks which inherently contain some health-protective compounds (e.g. red wine).
But if you wish to consume alcohol purely for perceived health benefits, then that's fine but at least know that there are numerous non-alcoholic options for almost any particular health benefit, be it anti-coagulatory or cardio-protective or whatever.

Lastly, always bear in mind that statistical conclusions about supposed 'ideal levels of consumption' may be shaped not just by health benefits but also by health detriments. So, if 1 glass of wine is good for you, but 3 glasses are damaging to the liver, then the average would be 2, and one might conclude that 2 is 'ideal'. I know that, in itself, is an absurdly over-simplified example, but it sufficiently illustrates the point.

In short, I agree with you - you are absolutely right to critically question the notions your friend related to you. However, to be fair to your friend, it may be that the context in which he made those remarks may have been that he was simply relating brief 'soundbites' of information rather than a serious, fully-formed (in his mind) overview of what he has learned about alcohol on his nutrition course. It's easy to take brief remarks out of the context in which they were made...

This kind of discussion could consume pages and pages of discussion... I'm boring myself, now, so I'll leave it at that! :-)


.

[MysticTree]

I have been known to have half a lager shandy from time to time. The additives in the lemonade are probably worse than the lager. I am lucky -I think- in that I don't like alcohol that much so I can happily leave it. I see lots of people who don't even realise they have a drink issue; they are often the ones who "have a couple after work" but fail to notice it's the whole bottle and can't imagine not drinking that much. I see a lot of sad drink attitudes from my friends on Facebook.

[Arky]

Yes, alcohol consumption is rather high in the UK at the moment, to my eyes at least. Economic downturn doesn't help the situation, either, what with people trying to cope with financial stresses and insecurities. The supermarkets are certainly raking it in as a consequence.

...but I don't feel it's necessarily consumed for coping. What I mean is that, for some people, I think it's literally just lack of conscious awareness. They know they're drinking, but it's like they're doing it out of socialised/conditioned habit rather than a fully-conscious decision. Just like coming home from work, switching the television on, and watching it all evening, in a semi-hypnotic stupor, for 5 hours or so. It doesn't tend to earn so much a second thought.


Personally, I was never addicted to alcohol and never drank it habitually. It was just a social thing once or twice a week (although considerably more frequently (socially) when I was at university). When I made a decision to stop consuming it, out of 'compassion' to my metal-intoxicated liver, I literally just stopped, immediately, and have never felt the least inclination to drink so much as a single glass since that day. But I know it's not so easy for those who have been drinking alcohol to hide from personal issues, be they current or historic. I saw the evidence of this during my years of working with people with various substance misuse addictions, and I know you have someone very close to you that makes this a relevant issue to you.

One thing I will say is that I have noticed that some friends and associates were surprisingly resistant to my becoming teetotal. I mean really resistant. It was none of their business whether or not I had a pint in my hand, yet some of them became borderline obnoxious at my refusal to cave-in to their attempts to coerce me to 'join in with everyone else' in drinking alcohol. I had anticipated some joking at my expense, but not actual resistance towards my personal decision. It was an object lesson in cognitive dissonance and what people will do to avoid it, but I can't deny my disappointment in witnessing it, first-hand, from people who I had expected would be more understanding or, at least, liberally indifferent to my decision. I didn't need 'support', but, at the very least, a little respect for my right to make my own choice, would have been nice :-|

[sport]

Alcohol is a poison but if you want a drink from time to time and it helps you (a bit like my occasional cup of tea) then have it. You should try not to have it too often and I am willing to bet that you will not even want it.
On the other hand this question was not just about you but about the alcohol. If you research it you will find more websites and gov agencies that say it is good for you than bad but they will say the same thing about meat and milk. They are paid to misguide us.

[Arky]

If you research it you will find more websites and gov agencies that say it is good for you than bad but they will say the same thing about meat and milk. They are paid to misguide us.

That's a very polarised standpoint, sport.

Just sayin', that's all.

Babies and bathwater...

[sport]

On some topics I can not help being polarised. My commitment level insists on it.

[aspie_and_proud]

This is a potentially very devisive (and contentious) question, but then I'm sure you're aware of that! ;-)



Yes, I know I tend to sound that way and "phrase" things that way. I think it may be a personality flaw, because, honestly, that is how I generally speak about things. I don't mean to, it is just how I have always been (for whatever reason).

I'm going to have to re-read your posts, they were very informative. :) I like the way you speak, it's actually how I attempt to speak, but (again) for some reason it comes out too bluntly and in an argumentative way.

[MysticTree]

One thing I will say is that I have noticed that some friends and associates were surprisingly resistant to my becoming teetotal. I mean really resistant. It was none of their business whether or not I had a pint in my hand, yet some of them became borderline obnoxious at my refusal to cave-in to their attempts to coerce me to 'join in with everyone else' in drinking alcohol. I had anticipated some joking at my expense, but not actual resistance towards my personal decision. It was an object lesson in cognitive dissonance and what people will do to avoid it, but I can't deny my disappointment in witnessing it, first-hand, from people who I had expected would be more understanding or, at least, liberally indifferent to my decision. I didn't need 'support', but, at the very least, a little respect for my right to make my own choice, would have been nice :-|I have experience that all my life (though I have drunk alcohol socially in the past). The occasions that I find most bemusing are when you go to a friends party and when they ask me what I'd like to drink and I say water please, they say you know where the glasses are and water is in the tap. These are otherwise polite people for some reason taking offence. Very odd.

[Arky]

This is a potentially very devisive (and contentious) question, but then I'm sure you're aware of that! ;-)




Yes, I know I tend to sound that way and "phrase" things that way. I think it may be a personality flaw, because, honestly, that is how I generally speak about things. I don't mean to, it is just how I have always been (for whatever reason).


Oh, no, no, not at all - you misinterpreted my meaning. I didn't mean you deliberately worded your question in a contentious manner. I didn't mean that at all. All I meant was that it's a contentious topic about which you were asking a question. The question itself is entirely valid and insightful.

Peace! :-)

[Arky]

I have experience that all my life (though I have drunk alcohol socially in the past). The occasions that I find most bemusing are when you go to a friends party and when they ask me what I'd like to drink and I say water please, they say you know where the glasses are and water is in the tap. These are otherwise polite people for some reason taking offence. Very odd.


Yes, I totally know that kind of situation! It's even worse in bars/pubs, when you're with others and they order and pay for their drinks and then the bartender turns to you and asks what you want, and you request water - I've had barstaff look at me disdainfully many times, due to them presuming that I'm asking for water because I'm being tight with my money.

Another thing is that, having already frowned at the non-alcohol side of things, people then can't understand why you don't want some sugar-laden non-alcoholic drink (J2O, Cola, etc.). Truly, it's amazing how divorced people seem to be from what their own physiology has evolved upon. I know many people (and I'm not just saying that; I really do mean many people) who literally will NOT drink plain water - EVER. They simply refuse to drink fluid unless it is sweetened or alcoholic. It's bizarre.

[Aleesha Sattva]

Sorry guys I've been sick or this thread would have been deleted earlier. I'll leave it but close it. We don't discuss alcohol use (or drug use) on the forum.

in light,
Admin