Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine Stats

Moderate Drinking May Improve Cognitive Health for Older Adults, Study Says (cnn.com) 129

Posted by EditorDavid from the drinking-responsibly dept.
"A new study found low to moderate drinking may improve cognitive function for White middle-aged or older adults," reports CNN: The findings support prior research which found that, generally, one standard drink a day for women and two a day for men -- which is the US guidance -- appears to offer some cognitive benefits... "There is now a lot of observational evidence showing that light to moderate alcohol drinking is associated with better cognitive function and a lower risk of dementia compared with alcohol abstaining," said senior principal research scientist Kaarin Anstey, a director of the NHMRC Dementia Centre for Research Collaboration in Australia, who was not involved in the study...

The new study, published Monday in JAMA Network Open, analyzed data on nearly 20,000 participants from the University of Michigan's Health and Retirement Study, a longitudinal panel study that surveys a representative sample of Americans on a variety of health issues. Study participants, who were predominately white, female and a mean age of 62, were given cognitive tests starting in 1996 through 2008, and were surveyed every other year for approximately nine years. When compared with those who said they never drank, low to moderate drinking was associated with significantly higher cognition scores for mental status, word recall and vocabulary over time, as well as with lower rates of decline in each of those areas.
But before you get too excited, CNN has a "However..." paragraph: However, a major global study released last year found that no amount of liquor, wine or beer is safe for your overall health. It found that alcohol was the leading risk factor for disease and premature death in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49 worldwide in 2016, accounting for nearly one in 10 deaths... "What we know for sure is that drinking too much alcohol definitely harms the brain in a major way. What is less clear is whether or not low to moderate intake may be protective in certain people, or if total abstinence is the most sound advice," said neurologist Dr. Richard Isaacson, founder of the Alzheimer's Prevention Clinic at NewYork-Presbyterian and Weill Cornell Medical Center. "Based on conflicting studies, I don't think at this time we can know for sure whether none versus low to moderate consumption is best in each individual person..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Moderate Drinking May Improve Cognitive Health for Older Adults, Study Says More

Moderate Drinking May Improve Cognitive Health for Older Adults, Study Says

Comments Filter:

  • Older adults (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Saturday July 04, 2020 @12:38PM (#60261416)

    "premature death in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49"

    Well, those young whippersnappers shouldn't drink and drive, we old farts drink at home.

  • Homeric wisdom (Score:3)

    by Anachronous Coward ( 6177134 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @12:43PM (#60261450)

    "Alcohol -- the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems."

    -- Homer Simpson

  • Given that the alcohol industry already tried this (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @12:52PM (#60261482)

    I'd be careful with that "research"...

    This was the exact mantra that the alcohol industry always repeated. "One drink a day is okay.".
    What a convenient ... coincidence ...

    And so easily swallowed too...

    I'm drinking a bottle of beer while writing this, by the way. I don't pretend it's healthy though.

  • It's /. so of course I barely skimmed the summary, but If I have a really, really big glass, I could probably put a handle or so of cheap vodka or whisky in one drink. Just sip for hours and hours.

  • Inconsistency... but publicity is more important (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Archtech ( 159117 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @01:00PM (#60261524)

    'However, a major global study released last year found that no amount of liquor, wine or beer is safe for your overall health. It found that alcohol was the leading risk factor for disease and premature death in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49 worldwide in 2016, accounting for nearly one in 10 deaths... "What we know for sure is that drinking too much alcohol definitely harms the brain in a major way. What is less clear is whether or not low to moderate intake may be protective in certain people, or if total abstinence is the most sound advice," said neurologist Dr. Richard Isaacson...'

    I do love accurate, honest reporting.

    1. "...no amount of liquor, wine or beer is safe for your overall health".

    2. "What is less clear is whether or not low to moderate intake may be protective in certain people..."

    How can this study have established for certain that "alcohol was the leading risk factor for disease and premature death in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49 worldwide in 2016, accounting for nearly one in 10 deaths..."? Is it really possible to get rid of all confounding factors? I don't see how that could be done.

    I actually started drinking every evening quite a few years ago, mainly for my health (although also because I like wine and whisky). I avoid beer because it is full of carbohydrate and probably is very fattening. The drier (less sweet) the drink, the better.

    If anyone is seriously interested in the facts, I suggest reading the very well documented "The Good News About Booze" by Tony Edwards.

    • And there are thousands of studies which say the opposite, e.g. 2 or 3 glasses of red wine are extending your life by 10 - 20 years.

      • How do you reconcile the difference between studies that show opposite things? Choose the conclusion that you like better?

        • Re:Inconsistency... but publicity is more importan (Score:4, Informative)

          by Archtech ( 159117 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @03:54PM (#60262040)

          How do you reconcile the difference between studies that show opposite things? Choose the conclusion that you like better?

          Tempting as that is, the better way is to analyze the way the studies were done and find (if you can) how they may not be watertight. Often, despite protestations to the contrary, confounding factors are not excluded. For example, it is quite likely that people who drink a lot of alcohol may also do (or neglect) other things that might make them unhealthy. (Such as smoking). Also many studies rely on questionnaires which ask subjects to say how much they drink (or whatever) - which is completely hopeless.

          I strongly recommend "Doctoring Data: How to Sort Out Medical Advice from Medical Nonsense" by Dr Malcolm Kendrick, a sceptical and down-to-earth Scot.

        • How do you reconcile the difference between studies that show opposite things? Choose the conclusion that you like better?

          You do a meta-study.

          • But it's still essential to check the methods used in every study. If some of the studies give grossly misleading conclusions because they were done wrongly, a metastudy will just lock in those mistakes like flies in amber.

            https://journals.plos.org/plos... [plos.org]

          • ok, so you do a meta-study and find that 15 studies show a particular food increases the risk of cancer, while 30 studies show it decreases the risk of cancer. What do you conclude?

            • There is usually no single reason.

              People on Sardinia get old. The drink wine.

              But they also eat healthy and many simply work till they die, mostly outdoors.

              Just an example.

              Japanese get very old, don't really drink red wine, but sake - and even those that work indoors get old.

              Opposite, many ppl in other studies simply live unhealthy lives. They die, but is "moderate drinking" a factor?

        • I go by results. 2-3 is perhaps a little high, but 1-2 is considered convincing.

          I don't care about the studies that claim otherwise because, for the most part, they don't show otherwise. They are poorly designed, aimed at a conclusion and don't show what they claim.

          I go for the research into those who are healthy and study why. Very different question.

          • I don't care about the studies that claim otherwise because, for the most part, they don't show otherwise.

            Sounds like you are suffering from a confirmation bias. Spend more time attacking studies you agree with, and less time attacking studies you don't agree with, which will help you get over your bias.

    • Ethanol is a carbohydrate

      • No. It's an alcohol. It's metabolized, but in no way like a carbohydrate. It is technically a hydrate, with carbon - but doesn't fit the rest of the definition.

  • No causality, but simplistic correlation (Score:4, Interesting)

    by La Gris ( 531858 ) <lea,gris&noiraude,net> on Saturday July 04, 2020 @01:08PM (#60261558) Homepage

    Years after years, even digging up old studies that are already known, such as stirring an already cooled sauce to bring out its scents, is more mercantile manipulation than science.

    After decades, telling us that moderate alcohol consumption would have health benefits, that there is no verification of casualness with concrete elements, makes me at best angry to be taken for a moron, and even more so here on Slashdot which originally dealt with technical and scientific subjects with much more critical thinking.

    There's really none of it left here, not even a trace of it.

    • > hat there is no verification of casualness

      Doesn't the casualness depend on who paid for the drinks? If it's for work discussion, I keep the receipts and put it on my daily expenses.

    • Yes there is.

      Red wine drinkers show a 15-20% improvement in gut flora.

      How concrete do you want? Short of adding in cement dust, we have a definite, provable, cause and effect where the effect is known to impact general and cognitive health.

  • Why would you rather drink than do shrooms?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ufgrat ( 6245202 )

      Mushrooms go well with wine.

      Not the hallucinogenic ones-- reality is disturbing enough, I don't need things to get stranger.

    • Because alcohol in low doses improves brain function, whereas mushrooms poison the brain and destroy cognitive ability.

      I prefer the better mind.

  • What the hell is cognitive health? How is that truly measured? A sand lizard is as dumb as a doorknob, yet free from neurological conditions many would consider the average sand lizard cognitively healthy. So ok, lets say IQ is cognitive health. You can have a high IQ and be depressed, thatâ(TM)s not cognitively healthy. Alright, so let us make happiness the cognitive health definition. You can be happy as a hog in shit, but dumb as one too. So then happiness is out as a definition of cognitive health.

    • If someone is:

      o Old
      o Registered as Republican
      o Fervently supports Donald Trump

      Then it's very likely their cognitive health is poor.
      </sarcastic_humor>

      In all seriousness, though, you can think of it as someone 'not being sharp' anymore, being very susceptible to being fooled (e.g., falling for scammers that you'd think anyone else wouldn't be fooled by at all), 'being confused' often, failing memory, etc, then that's poor cognitive health. The sad thing is that someone who is suffering from th

    • As is the case with many definitions, it requires a fair amount of careful thinking to define "cognitive health". It's necessary to identify the right thing and eliminate blatant errors. Try this for a starting point:

      Cognitive health is quickly evaluating evidence and acting accordingly.

      Unstated but inherent upon consideration is that greater cognitive health can handle more complex evidence.

      Because definitions should be concise, I do not include in the definition that people who through disability are unab

  • How about moderate cocaine use? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by future assassin ( 639396 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @01:25PM (#60261606)

    Got a DUI 7 months ago (just failed even though I waited some time before driving) but seems the beers were 9% at the pub. Anyways so I switched over to hookers and blow on Fridays instead of alcohol.

    • I got a medical Marijuana card. Much more pleasant than drinking, should have started ages ago.

      • I'm around weed all day but don't like the high so don't smoke, same with alcohol I can't drink during the day it wears me out and makes me lazy.

    • Got a DUI 7 months ago (just failed even though I waited some time before driving) but seems the beers were 9% at the pub.

      Yeah, I hate those high-alcohol beers.

      Damn it, I like beer. Why do those craft breweries think it's cool to start making beer where I'm not able to drink more than a snifter full? And I don't ever want to be in the position of not realizing it's a 10% alcohol been, drinking one and then when I stand up realizing "oh, shit, I drove here. How do I get home?"

  • My noggin' definitely works better, and I become a bit more productive, when having had one or two ~5% ABV beers. It's not enough to make me tipsy but it's enough that something cognitive-wise "clicks" into place... in lack of a better description.
    • Alcohol depresses nervous system activity. If a task requiring steadiness is undertaken by someone who's twitchy, alcohol may help. I've heard that a beer helps a darts player's accuracy.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dcw3 ( 649211 )

        Many years ago, I played league darts, and it was a common belief. I'll also mention that during my coding days in the late 90s, my office mate and I would occasionally work from home, and both came to the conclusion that we were more productive (creative) after a beer or two. More than that certainly has the opposite effect.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by lsllll ( 830002 )
          The Ballmer Peak explains your finding: https://xkcd.com/323/ [xkcd.com] But most people wouldn't get to the peak after 2 drinks, unless they were each double shots or two 9% brews. Then you have to figure out how to keep yourself in the peak. It's a delicate balance.
    • This is the alcohol talking, for sure. Any perceived "boost" you gets immediately counteracted because that's what GABA does. It down-regulates excitation and if you believe your cognition is sharper when "down-regulated", be glad lions and tigers aren't a real threat to your existence.

      • This is the alcohol talking, for sure. Any perceived "boost" you gets immediately counteracted because that's what GABA does. It down-regulates excitation and if you believe your cognition is sharper when "down-regulated", be glad lions and tigers aren't a real threat to your existence.

        Yes, that's demonstrated by the fact that alcohol has no effect on people, and the word "drunk" is purely psychological.

        Oh, wait, there are known effects of alcohol on cognition? Then your statement is apparently inaccurate: GABA in fact does not immediately counteract the effect of alcohol.

        Or were you saying that it's a selective effect, it cancels good effects immediately, but does nothing to bad effects, even when they're the same effect?

      • You've not met many autistic people, have you?

        I'd be far better equipt to handle lions, tigers and bears after a half glass of red wine.

  • Probably both but I can't figure out if the statistics there are just correlation? There is a term "alcohol-attributable" used but I not sure it's in mathematical context of statistic and a medical narration?

    • Causation. We know that alcohol impacts gut flora. Specifically, it kills off those that tend to be detrimental and causes the rest to increase in variation.

      Gut flora generate chemicals that alter brain function and the immune system.

      The greater the variation, the healthier both brain and immune system operate.

      And that is why you get the boosted longevity and better cognition.

      Cognition may be dampened temporarily but the changes to the gut outlast the effects of alcohol. The rest of the time, the brain impr

  • There is no practical conflict between the studies (Score:4, Insightful)

    by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @01:58PM (#60261738)
    There is no practical conflict between the studies. If you are living longer but senile are your really "living longer"?
  • Maybe instead of drinking they should try getting their blood plasma diluted [slashdot.org]. I'm sure some super-rich old person will pay to try it; anyone got a line on someone like that so we can get a report back on efficacy?

  • This cannot be true (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mmdurrant ( 638055 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @02:54PM (#60261912)
    The way alcohol affects GABA - with long-term use causing permanent neurological damage - tells us that these substances cannot help cognition. At all.

  • Correlation != causation (Score:3)

    by bluegutang ( 2814641 ) on Saturday July 04, 2020 @03:18PM (#60261966)

    The study in question found that moderate drinking is "associated" with good cognitive health. Slashdot editorializes this to "offers benefits". Confusing correlation with causation.

    Previously we've had studies showing that drinking wine is associated with good health. The usual interpretation of those studies is that wine drinkers are usually rich people, who are healthier on average for reasons unrelated to wine. I imagine something similar is the case here, with moderate drinking probably being a social practice among groups that are healthier for other reasons - perhaps they are more social than people in general.

  • - Stay home or the covid will kill you.
    - Drink more while at home and at work.
    - Wear you masks if you do go out.
    - HCQ will kill you.
    - Russians control the president.
    - Orange man bad.
    - America is racist and must be destoryed
    - Protesters are peaceful. They would never kill, rob and destroy. Just ignore those fires in the background.
    - Antifa doesn't exist.
    - Up is down, down is up.
    - GO BACK TO SLEEP!!! .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93ByMEx50Zc
  • I don't drink but my cognitive health is just — SQUIRREL!
  • Anyone with half a brain is more likely to drink alcohol and have the means of acquiring it. Just like with drinking coffee, people who drink 2 or more cups per day have fewer heart issues... likely because their heart isn't telling them to stop drinking coffee so much.
  • This is the second such "study" I've seen from a "reputable source" that fails to mention that pre-menopausal women who ingest alcohol are at risk of pregnancy and giving birth to a child with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, a lifetime of pain and heartbreak (at best) for the child, the parents, caregivers, and others who have to interact with the child - for life: https://ncfasdinformed.org/ [ncfasdinformed.org] & https://medlineplus.gov/fetala... [medlineplus.gov]
  • A case of beer a day and watching Alone and Survivorman. And a shot of vodka every time someone on those shows eats a bug.

  • ... has rejected this argument.

    Beer nazi.

  • Our new study has demonstrated that doing research that supplies a headline both confirming the conventional world view and supporting a large industry is excellent for assuring continued funding. Further, we have found that the simple expedient of burying counter-arguments and caveats in the conclusion and only briefly alluding to them in the abstract we can preserve our scientific reputations.

  • You have to be stupid to take part in mental studies while being sober.

  • Whether it's diets, alcohol, Covid, etc, the"experts" can't seem to agree on anything. And they wonder why we're skeptical of anything they say.
  • They show up every once in a while, these pro-alcoholic beverage consumption articles, because somehow, "research labs" all around the world keep finding that consuming "a small amount" "every once in a while" "is good for you". What a freaking joke. Just cut it out already. Aren't you at Slashdot tired of being just another news site used by the alcohol industry? No, I'm not gonna read any word in this BS article, I already know how it goes. Screw that.

  • I've read through all of the posts here, and seen much whining but little to point to where the study is inaccurate. Show us what mistakes they made, and I'm not talking about giving us contrary studies as evidence. I'm also not talking about some of the issues people brought up that really are not pertinent, such as drinking while pregnant.

  • Because there is always a related XKCD. https://xkcd.com/323/ [xkcd.com]

Slashdot Top Deals

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Close