Should We Be Drinking Less? (nytimes.com) 174
Can a daily drink or two lead to better health? For many years, the federal government's influential dietary guidelines implied as much, saying there was evidence that moderate drinking could lower the risk of heart disease and reduce mortality. But now a committee of scientists that is helping to update the latest edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans is taking a harder stance on alcohol. From a report: The committee said in a recent conference call that it plans to recommend that men and women who drink limit themselves to a single serving of wine, beer or liquor per day. Do not drink because you think it will make you healthier, the committee says: It won't. And it maintains that drinking less is generally better for health than drinking more. That message is a departure from previous guidelines, which since 1980 have defined "moderate" drinking as up to two drinks a day for men and one for women. Government agencies have also long defined a standard drink as 12 ounces of regular beer, five ounces of wine, or one and a half ounces of distilled spirits (40 percent alcohol), amounts often exceeded in Americans' typical "drink."
Between 1990 and 2010, many editions of the guidelines, which are updated every five years, discouraged heavy drinking and warned pregnant women and people with certain medical conditions not to drink. But they also noted that moderate drinking was linked to fewer heart attacks and lower mortality. The 2010 guidelines mentioned that moderate drinking may even "help to keep cognitive function intact with age." The new recommendation would be a victory for experts who have long questioned the health halo around moderate drinking. They say that studies showing it can protect health are deeply flawed, and that any potential cardiovascular benefits would be outweighed by the fact that alcohol is a leading preventable cause of cancer. According to the National Cancer Institute, even one drink a day increases the risk of breast, esophageal and oral cancer. The new advice is not yet final. The advisory panel is expected to include it in a report that it will release publicly in mid-July and submit to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services. Those two agencies are scheduled to publish the official dietary guidelines later this year.
Between 1990 and 2010, many editions of the guidelines, which are updated every five years, discouraged heavy drinking and warned pregnant women and people with certain medical conditions not to drink. But they also noted that moderate drinking was linked to fewer heart attacks and lower mortality. The 2010 guidelines mentioned that moderate drinking may even "help to keep cognitive function intact with age." The new recommendation would be a victory for experts who have long questioned the health halo around moderate drinking. They say that studies showing it can protect health are deeply flawed, and that any potential cardiovascular benefits would be outweighed by the fact that alcohol is a leading preventable cause of cancer. According to the National Cancer Institute, even one drink a day increases the risk of breast, esophageal and oral cancer. The new advice is not yet final. The advisory panel is expected to include it in a report that it will release publicly in mid-July and submit to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services. Those two agencies are scheduled to publish the official dietary guidelines later this year.
In short... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly - after all how I am supposed to drink less than nothing?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh shit, I'm all out of medals.
Just spitballin' here, but it's possible that the "we" in this headline is about "us" on a whole and not "you" specifically.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the royal we? Damn.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't know, but your might want to tell my doc who asked me if I drink less than before, and when I truthfully said no (because for that I'd have to somehow produce alcohol due to not drinking any) I got a tirade on how dangerous alcohol is.
No, telling him "there is no less than none" didn't work. Doctors ain't mathematicians, tell them what they want to hear and don't expect logic.
Re: (Score:2)
It might have been easier just to tell him that you don't drink. This is what I do, it kind of makes further discussion moot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"No."
Exactly! It's against the law!
Betteridge's Law of Headlines ending with a Question Mark.
Re: (Score:2)
I stand with Betteridge!
Re: (Score:2)
Yes
We really should. Especially in lockdown, where
Ah fuck it you first I'm going to get another beer.
Still should be drinking less. Ain't gonna.
Re: (Score:2)
Now do hate speech.
Re:Fuck Them (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't a binary state problem. Most foods that we have been eating for generations, isn't necessarily that bad for us. However especially Americans we love to go on excess.
4oz of wine. not a big deal. However when we see Alcohol is good, we will drink 2-3 10oz servings a day.
A cup of coffee in the morning, isn't that bad. A bug mug that is about 4 cups not so much
2-3 Eggs for breakfast isn't that bad. 6 Scrambled eggs with Milk and Cheese, not so much.
When they say Pot had health benefits. It isn't about puffing up a storm, just taking the correct amount of dosage.
Even the foods that we have little disagreement that they are good for us (fruits and vegetables) Rarely are able to fully cover our deitry needs, so we need to take some of what we had considered the bad stuff to help us survive.
If you drink Alcohol and you are feeling buzzed then you probably had too much.
If you drink Coffee and you get a real energy boost then you probably had too much
If you eat eggs then you feel bloated then you probably had too much
Re: Fuck Them (Score:3)
That's the kicker. Most things in moderation works. Most people drink or eat way to much. Portion sizes in the USA have been out of control for decades. The average meal size at a restaurant is about half of your daily food needs for calories. Now eat three of those a day?
Eat smaller meals.
Re: (Score:3)
Your body is specifically designed to get rid of alchohol, so probably a good idea not to drink but a life without any vices, with claims that perfection of social integration must be maintained at all times with zero tolerance for faults, well, right there a good reason to do pot instead, drunk posting can really fuck your entire life up but stoned posting, well, that will just make people laugh ;D.
every day is too much (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Words to live by!
Re: (Score:3)
I thought that was more commonly called, "any given Saturday night"?
Re: (Score:3)
You mean a US beer like Dogfish Head 90 Minute Imperial IPA?
Re: (Score:3)
Ha, yeah you're clearly not familiar with West Coast Ale (this could be true in other parts of the US as well, I just don't know about it). When my British friends come out this way it's not uncommon to hear a little bit of growsing in regards to the commonly high ABVs, Especially when all they're in the mood for is a proper session beer.
Our brewing style is overwhelming dominated by high ABV IPAs. It's not at all a common to go into a place with 50 taps only to discover that offers a false sense of variety
Thank God (Score:5, Funny)
I know when I first assumed legal drinking age, the "Dietary Guidelines for Americans" was a must-read. I used this guide to help me learn how much drinking was appropriate. Now that I'm an adult, like the rest of society, everyone I know uses this guide to dictate their alcohol consumption. So these revisions are very helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally I learnt the lesson the hard way and used that to stop drinking. I turned 18, wrote myself off with alcohol and then swore to never drink again. I then did repeated the exercise weekly in the name of science because anecdotes is not data, and I needed data.
Now that I'm an adult I know far better. I realise you can also drink during the week.
Sounds like the puritans have taken hold of policy (Score:3, Insightful)
This happened in the UK a while back, reducing the recommended weekly maximum to 14 units (about 6 pints) from 27. There was no real scientific evidence for dropping it, and they equalised it for men and women despite the physical differences.
The result is that everybody ignores it because it's so obviously ludicrously low, especially for the amount that Brits typically drink.
There is plenty of evidence that the effect of alcohol is not that high up to around 40 units a week, which is 20 weak small American 'Light' pints or 15 proper pints.
Sure, drinking every day is not good, nor is binging on a regular basis. That's good advice to give.
Telling your average stressed citizen that they can only have a small glass of wine in the evening, no, it's not going to work. It's counterproductive to reduce the levels as it causes a loss of respect for the advice.
Why bother? (Score:2)
So the only reason some people are drinking is that they believe it is good from their health?
Re: (Score:2)
So the only reason some people are drinking is that they believe it is good from their health?
I guess that explains Bud Lite.
Re: (Score:2)
> I guess that explains Bud Lite.
We don't usually drink enough water so any extra bit helps. /s :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Even if it pushes a 5-times-a-week drinker to reduce it to 4-times-a-week, that's a win.
Why is that a win? If you're a "one glass of red wine a day" drinker, you're a "7-times-a-week drinker." It's not clear that there is some benefit to reducing this, only some nebulous "well, you did it less, so that's better!" which seems more like social policy rather than health policy.
Note: I'm more of a "7-times-a-year drinker" so I have no dog in this fight.
Re: (Score:2)
There could be such people. I personally dislike the taste of alcohol -- it smells like a cleaning product -- but about a decade back there seemed to be research consensus that moderate consumption of alcohol is good for you, and I was seriously worried that by not drinking alcohol I was shortening my life. I was very seriously thinking of getting a bottle of Everclear, putting it in a hip flask and adding an unnoticeable bit of alcohol to things that I was drinking throughout the day, measured out to add u
Re: (Score:2)
Correlation admittedly isn't causation, but there is a correlation between consumption of 1-5 cups of coffee per day and an 8-15% reduction in (annual?) risk of death, with higher quantities connected to a higher reduction: https://www.health.harvard.edu... [harvard.edu] .
Everclear is pretty much ethanol and water, and I was thinking that a small amount of ethanol added to other things, like juice, wouldn't be nasty. One unit of alcoholic beverages is 18 ml. If I had three 350ml glasses of orange or apple juice, spaced t
Correlation vs Causation? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're healthy, you can probably enjoy a drink every once in awhile. You probably socialize more in scenarios where alcohol is served. You probably have less worry and stress in your life. If you're unlucky genetically, you're either taking every step you can to stay healthy, including limiting booze or just dying relatively young...so that by the time people are in their 60s, it's the drinkers that are still around.
I have never seen anyone improve their healthy by just drinking more. Sure wine has antioxidants, but no more than grapes or many other varieties of fresh fruit. Some of us are just genetically more healthy than others. I know people who do everything right...exercise, diet strictly, etc...and feel and look like crap...they're just unlucky genetically. In contrast, everyone knows someone who lives off pizza and beer and looks great with their shirt off....some can do that into their 40s....all while never having a single health issue. Life is unfair that way.
The bottom line is alcohol is a poison. Sure, it's fun to drink and in moderation, your body can easily handle it. However, we have yet to find any scenario in which consuming alcohol improves your health....we just know many can consume it and still be healthy. These studies have been going on for a very long time. If alcohol improved your health, we'd know about it. We'd have optimal doses for consumption for various ailments.
Don't get me wrong, I love booze. I just know I am not doing myself a favor, health-wise, by consuming it.
Re:Correlation vs Causation? (Score:5, Informative)
"The bottom line is alcohol is a poison"
The cardinal rule of toxicology is "the dose makes the poison" so you can get water poisoning if you drink enough of it.
Dose is irrelevant when it is purely poison (Score:2)
"The bottom line is alcohol is a poison"
The cardinal rule of toxicology is "the dose makes the poison" so you can get water poisoning if you drink enough of it.
Eh...that's technically true (it blew my mind when they told me that in school), but misleading. Your body can tolerate extremely small doses of the most deadly poisons, but there are many that have no benefits whatsoever. There's no sense in introducing a poison unless you get a benefit.
To my knowledge, no one has found a medicinal use for cyanide. Any dosage is either poisonous or so low it's not harmful...same for DDT, radioactive waste, etc. Even if harmless, you never want to consume these. T
Re: (Score:3)
There's a parallel for alcohol in regards to health.
That's the part of your claim that is, at best, unproven.
There are studies showing it has health benefits, that the people in the submission dismiss as "flawed". But they are unable to cite any studies showing the opposite. So you can't just assert "it's a poison!!". You need some proof.
And this:
If you've drank before, you know this well...you never feel better the next day
Is not proof. You got that hangover from binge drinking way more than the "moderate" recommendations. Or you're not keeping yourself hydrated which is a different problem.
Re: (Score:2)
There's a parallel for alcohol in regards to health.
That's the part of your claim that is, at best, unproven.
There are studies showing it has health benefits, that the people in the submission dismiss as "flawed". But they are unable to cite any studies showing the opposite. So you can't just assert "it's a poison!!". You need some proof.
And this:
If you've drank before, you know this well...you never feel better the next day
Is not proof. You got that hangover from binge drinking way more than the "moderate" recommendations. Or you're not keeping yourself hydrated which is a different problem.
Oh yeah, good point. Most people need more than "moderate" drinking to feel anything the next day. Heck, a lot of people feel better if they have half a glass of wine to help them settle down for a better night's sleep. People really can drink in moderation.
Re: (Score:2)
To my knowledge, no one has found a medicinal use for cyanide. Any dosage is either poisonous or so low it's not harmful...same for DDT, radioactive waste, etc. Even if harmless, you never want to consume these. There's no benefit. There's a parallel for alcohol in regards to health.
Consume if you like the taste or like getting buzzed/drunk, but don't fool yourself...you're not making yourself healthier.
It can clearly enhance reproductive health. Even after my wife and I were married, the drink or two that it took to get me on the dance floor helped our marriage tremendously. She finally understood that it wasn't that I did not love her enough to dance with her, but that I loved her too much to allow her to be seen with me trying to dance.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like thinking chemotherapy drugs are the cause of cancer because the people taking them all have cancer.
Oh I'm sure, if you looked hard enough, you'd find some anti-vaxxers who also believe thiat.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like thinking chemotherapy drugs are the cause of cancer because the people taking them all have cancer.
Ironically, some chemotherapy drugs are in fact highly carcinogenic. The same goes for radiation therapy.
Sometimes you just have to accept that risk if the odds of curing your current cancer are higher than the odds of causing a new one.
Re: (Score:2)
In contrast, everyone knows someone who lives off pizza and beer and looks great with their shirt off
Well sure. If you're not too picky most women look better with their shirt off. Even the ones who live off pizza and beer.
Re: (Score:2)
Tetrodotoxine is also natural and humans have been eating fugu for quite some time.
Re:Correlation vs Causation? (Score:5, Insightful)
Alcohol is natural
Can we stop with this line already? Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with you, if pointing out that something "is natural" is one of your bullet points in arguing that a thing is safe, you're immediately off to a bad start because that claim is equally as true of anthrax, botulism, Bubonic Plague; famines; blizzards, earthquakes, hurricanes, avalanches, rip tides; old age, dementia; predators eating us, and the list goes on.
Frankly, leaving "it's natural" off your list makes for a far stronger case, since anyone including it is either pandering to a crowd or not giving sufficient thought to what they're saying. "It's natural" is, at best, meaningless fluff, and at worst a blatant attempt at disregarding or covering up the dangers inherent in the thing being described.
5%10% of the time, drinking leads to DRINKING (Score:3)
What isn't mentioned, is that for 5%-10% of the adult population, moderate drinking is followed by problem drinking, whether daily heavy drinking or occasional benders that cause
real problems in their life.
For 90%-95% of people a couple beers is no big deal. My wife and my mom are in that group. For 5%-10% it ends up destroying your life. My dad and brothers are in that group.
For most people, COVID doesn't cause major problems. I don't recommend experimenting with covid or alcohol, because you don't know which group you're in until it's too late.
Are you kidding? (Score:5, Funny)
Have you seen the state of the world?
Hell, I have that before 10am. By cocktail hour, I'm crushing up lines of hydroxychloroquine and oxycodone and drinking straight Lysol.
Re:Are you kidding? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
/Oblg. My doctor said "Only have 1 glass of alcohol a day." I can live with that. [funny-jokes.com]
Should we be drinking less? (Score:3, Informative)
Seems like a particularly bad time in history to ignore the merits of alcohol.
And from a historical perspective:
"the Mayflower shipped more beer than water when it departed for the New World in 1620."
"alcohol consumption was much higher in the nineteenth century than it is today -- 7.1 US gallons (27 l) of pure alcohol per person per year" Of course if your choice was beer, whisky or cholera from untreated water, I'd stay away from just plain water.
Because clean water was rare. (Score:4, Informative)
"the Mayflower shipped more beer than water when it departed for the New World in 1620."
If you don't boil your liquid and you need it to stay patogen-free, alcohol is pretty much your only choice.
Beer was healthier because clean water was rare back then and boiling it had not yet moved in as this new fad from arabia.
Boiling water and drinking coffee and tea instead of alcohol gave rise to the enlightenment and the intellectual sphere as it became a fashion that moved in from the east, far east and arabia.
Until then alcohol was the only source of patogen-free liquid in Europe. Hence 12% alcohol in "childrens beer" and even more in regular beer.
Re: (Score:3)
I was under the impression that everyday beer that substituted water was at a much lower ABV. This Wikipedia article mentions low single-digit ABVs ("between 0.5% to 2.8%") as being common:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
It mentions stronger beer was expensive. Makes sense - You need to use more grain to reach higher ABVs, and grain was comparatively a lot more expensive back then. 12% would have been strictly for partying, or the czar. Besides, if you replaced all your water intake with 12% brew, you'd
Re: (Score:2)
I find it amusing that those who are whining they don't have any money because they aren't working are the same ones talking about how much they're drinking since they're not working.
And from a historical perspective
Because their water was polluted. Everyone drank alcohol back then.
Of course if your choice was beer, whisky or cholera from untreated water, I'd stay away from just plain water.
As I just said
It's not going to make that much of a difference (Score:2)
The science around this keeps vacillating, drink more, drink less, yada yada.
In the end what everyone should do, is to do things that agree with your physiology.
It can't be the case that more, or less drinking is the perfect answer for everyone.
So see how different things affect you, and do what works for your body, avoiding social pressure to consume anything that you know will be bad without sufficient reward.
Whichever way you decide to go on drinking will not make a massive difference in the end, so do w
I understand the subtext ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Clearly this study is meant to tell us we should be smoking weed more often.
Unsubscribe (Score:4, Funny)
I don't need this negativity in my life.
Simple (Score:3, Insightful)
In an ideal world you do not put nerve toxins in your body.
However, stress is a killer too. So before you go taking Xanax, have a beer instead and see if it helps you chill.
Do that once or twice a week while the going is rough. Otherwise don't habitually drink. You'll be fine.
Yes, you would love longer... (Score:2)
But would it be worth it if all that time was spend sober?
This reminds me of the character of the 100 year old in After Life. Living past 80-85 always looks pretty miserable.
Re: (Score:2)
But would it be worth it if all that time was spend sober?
Yes, it would be great to love longer - and being sober would mean I enjoyed (and remembered) every minute of it.
Re:Yes, you would love longer... (Score:4, Funny)
You won't live longer, it just feels like it.
Or another joke:
Doc, I want to live to 100.
Do you smoke?
Nope.
Drink?
Nope.
Sleeping around?
Nope.
Then what the heck do you want to live to 100 for?
WTF?!?? Could you *please* make it clear ... (Score:2)
... that you're talking about alcohol. Thank you.
To clarify:
No, you probably shouldn't drink less.
You should, however, probably drink less alcohol.
Especially if you're asking yourself that question it's out of question that you're drinking to much alcohol.
That the term "drinking" automatically implies for some people "drinking alcohol" pretty much illustrates the problem right there.
My 2 cents.
Re: (Score:2)
What else should we drink? Water? Yuck, fish fuck in that!
Re: (Score:2)
Guidelines are not usually what you "should" do (Score:2)
Doctor's tried giving out the actual advice of what you "should" do and found it discouraged people so much they gave up and did nothing.
modest amounts of everything (Score:2)
You can have a modest amount of drink, if you eat a modest amount, and exercise a modest amount.
If you eat too much, don't exercise, and your in bad health like most Americans, then quitting drinking alone is not really going solve all those other problems.
Trust a government committee of scientists? (Score:2)
Maybe the government should sit this one out. They have a poor track record on nutritional advice going back decades plus the FDA, CDC and WHO have too often looked like the three stooges instead of scientific role models during the pandemic.
Seriously? (Score:2)
Look, I know that a lot of people like to drink but let's not kid ourselves here. Alcohol is in no way healthy to the human body. Heavy drinking ( more than 4 drinks per day for a man, 3 for women) has been proven, beyond a doubt to lead to the following:
1) Liver disease
2) Heart disease
3) Brain and nervous system functions
4) Many types of cancer
5) Gout
6) Infections
7) Digestive issues
8) Sleep issues
This is according to WebMD.
What is debatable is whether or not moderate drinking leads to any of these issues.
Re: (Score:2)
All of the negative things aside, there are no physical benefits to consuming alcohol.
This is the assertion in the submission that is not actually proven. They claim studies showing benefits are "flawed", but don't cite studies showing moderate drinking is harmful.
Instead, they, like you, try to conflate it with the problems of heavy drinking.
In fact, the human liver cannot process alcohol and secretes it which is how cirrhosis of the liver happens.
Uh, no. The human liver processes alcohol just fine. Problems arise in disposiing of the resulting products in heavy drinkers. But we're still not talking about heavy drinking.
Your kidneys deal with water consumption just fine....until you drink so
Muslims (Score:3, Insightful)
The western world is seeing more muslims in more influential positions than before. Nothing wrong per se in a representative democracy, although it unavoidably increases the negative sentiment toward alcohol.
Teetotalers, vegans, climate activists and their ilk are definitely striving to impose lifestyle changes.
Re: (Score:2)
To which I say, back the hell off and worry about imposing mandates from your religion onto your own life. This is exactly why we have separation of church and state.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing wrong per se in a representative democracy, although it unavoidably increases the negative sentiment toward alcohol.
The negative sentiment toward alcohol has always existed by anyone whose job has been to study alcohol, its affects on society and to make guidelines for governments.
Muslims? Seriously? You could at least hide your racism a bit.
Odd reasoning... (Score:2)
"and that any potential cardiovascular benefits would be outweighed by the fact that alcohol is a leading preventable cause of cancer"
Cancer doesn't even rate as a cause of death relative to heart disease, particularly for men.
Ethanol is not a nutrient in any way shape or form (Score:2)
Scoff at this? Consider this: you drink too much ethanol, what happens? You get very sick. You throw up. You might stop breathing and die. It causes a wide array of damage to every system of your body. It dehydrates the fuck out of you, as your body pulls in water from all over your body trying to rid itself of it. A hangover is the side-effects of the damage it's caused you. Cirrhosis of the liver, if you're a chronic, lo
Re: (Score:2)
Ethanol is a poison your body works hard to get rid of.
Scoff at this? Consider this: you drink too much ethanol, what happens? You get very sick. You throw up. You might stop breathing and die.
You realize I can say exactly the same thing about water, right? You drink too much water, you get very sick, you throw up, and you die.
You can't conflate consuming very large quantities of a substance with consuming smaller quantities of that substance. Every single vitamin is toxic in large enough doses, yet we die without them.
Dear Dietary Guidelines Decision Makers, (Score:3)
Give me my fifth of whiskey a night and go away.
That is all.
Yet Another Study (Score:2)
This study shows that a low amount of alcohol in older adults can help prevent cognitive decline. [medicalnewstoday.com] 20,000 participants.
Alcohol reduces clotting but increases cancer (Score:2)
I looked into this a while ago, alcohol seems to be a tradeoff where it increases your risk of cancer with no risk-free dose, but decreases chance of heart attack and stroke at low or perhaps moderate doses. This seems like an unequivocal plus for older people who have cardiovascular issues, but a likely bad trade for someone young and healthy.
Currently, coronavirus has more people than usual (over)drinking from boredom. But also, coronavirus seems to cause blood clots [cornell.edu].
The operative word is THIRSTY. (Score:2)
It is, always has been, and always will be.
If you are not thirsty when other actual real physical indicators (not Coca-Cola FUD) clearly show you need water, something's wrong with your body and you need to see a doc.
Ditto when you are thirsty but don't need any. (In that case I recommend just consuming less salt/"electrolytes". Will get rid of the sweating too.)
----------
And while we're at it: The way to tell if food is still good, or if food is spieced/fried/baked/etc to the right point, is to SMELL it. T
Hasn't anyone just stated the obvious? (Score:2)
I don't care what the government or lobbyists tell me on this issue. I don't drink alcohol because no matter how it's prepared, it all tastes like shit.
I mean, aren't our senses of taste and smell supposed to have evolved over billions of years as protection mechanisms? Our taste buds and noses are saying, "THIS IS SHIT! Stop drinking this..." Shouldn't we listen to them?
If we smell rotten meat, we're repulsed by it. But if we smell alcohol stench, we look for assurances that it's OK to drink X/day. Why?
If
I don't drink and I know why (Score:2)
It was easy when I stopped, because I was in hospital after an injury and had a concussion. So drinking wasn't reasonable. Afterwards however did I decide to keep it up and never had another drink. It actually changed my perspective. I used to smoke, too, and had stopped some years before, and I knew it changes one's perspective and I didn't think this would happen with me again, but I was wrong.
Now ten years in do I feel better, I keep more fit, I've lost weight, I handle stress, grief and sadness better..
I hate to admit its not good for me. (Score:3)
I decided to monitor my blood sugar even though I do not have diabetes. The device and test strips are not very expensive and there is a history of diabetes in my family.
When I drink 1 or 2 servings daily for a week my blood sugar goes to 105 to 110 mg/dL after a 12 hour fast. This is the low end of being pre-diabetic.
If I don't drink for a week, is stabilizes at 85 to 95 which should be fine.
I'm experimenting with how much I can tolerate, but its looking like I'm bound to become an occasional social drinker only as I age. I love mixing cocktails and making and drinking beer and wine so I'm disappointed but my health is more than important to me.
Red wine (Score:2)
Stop lying to yourselves (Score:2)
The evidence has been clear for decades; 4 units of alcohol a week slightly improves health. Now look up how many units your beverage is.
A drink or two a day is unambiguously harmful in numerous ways.
Re:Let's start by eating less... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmmm.. Unhappy I see. Maybe a few drinks would do you good.
Look, not everybody is a fat slob who runs around Wal Mart. Yea, as a whole we are over indulged here in the USA, but it's a function of our wealth (which is a function of our productivity, which is a function of past hard work..). Shouting about stereotypes and looking down on others perceived faults isn't pretty, nor is it useful. Everybody needs to take responsibility for themselves and their families, and be taught self reliance. But the back side of self reliance is an attitude of "live and let live" where I make my choices, you make yours and everybody agrees to disagree when necessary. It's called tolerance and respect.
So stop with the "I'm better than them" attitude, live and let live, don't judge others and be tolerant of the choices others make. It's their life.
Like me, for example, I don't drink at all and never really have since the once or twice I did in college... But I don't care if you do or not. If it's something you choose, I'm fine with it. You do what you want. If you wanted to binge watch Chick Flicks or Horror movies next weekend, it's fine with me too...
The problem is (Score:4, Interesting)
Now your health insurance rates keep going up to pay for all these fat fucks taking heart attacks and let's not forget about how much insulin costs in the USA compared to the rest of the planet. You can literally fly to Europe and buy it cheaper including the plane ticket. The garbage food being produced and consumed does have a cost.
Re:The problem is (Score:4, Insightful)
So where do you draw the line then?
Are you saying that YOU have the right to make choices for others here because it may impact you in some minor way? Sorry, no sale with me. I don't make your choices and I don't feel have the right. If you want to engage in dangerous behaviors (illicit unprotected sex for example) and end up having financial troubles due to the resulting medical expenses, Power to you. Your life, live it your way, just don't expect me to cry about your woes. Same with the increased insurance costs, there are things driving my healthcare costs up much faster than the cost of insulin (i.e. stupid government regulations) so the few dollars it costs me isn't enough to warrant my imposing control of YOUR life choices..
The cost of insulin in this country is related to the ability to pay, not the level of the demand. We have taken away all of the normal supply/demand/cost relationships in this country by having health insurance and government being the usual payers, not individuals. There literally is very little downward pressure on prices here, nobody but the insurance companies care (government doesn't really care, they just print more dollars to pay).
In fact, ALL prescription drugs in this country suffer from the same issues. We can afford to pay more and People don't directly pay for these things, so nobody cares what they cost. In other countries, people don't earn as much, still directly pay their medical expenses and that means that cost matters to the consumer and prices are lower.
Re: (Score:2)
Normally I'm not a fan of government having its hands in everything but its a public health crisis at this point. The market is pushing nothing but unhealthy garbage and even the lifespan in the USA is decreasing. So now the government has to step in with its heavy hand and fix things.
I'd love to know what government regulations you think are driving up insurance. The USA pays the most for health insurance while having a decreasing lifespan. Where do you think insurance companies get their money from? Peopl
Re:Let's start by eating less... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is interesting these days is the wealthier you are, the more likely you are to be skinnier (of course, YMMV). Getting fat, while it needs a certain level of income, is now associated in the rich world with mostly with poor-quality foods (fast food, highly processed folded, etc). The wealthier people tend to actually eat more fresh food, which is better for you and doesn't make you as fat.
Re: (Score:2)
Crap, slipped again. +1 Insightful, instead.
Re: (Score:3)
live and let live, don't judge others and be tolerant of the choices others make. It's their life.
The obesity situation is a complex thing but certainly one input is the increasingly prevalent notion that it is somehow not OK to point out that obesity is not healthy. It has been repeatedly shown that it is not in study after study and the bulk of those findings have held up well over time.
It may well be that the obese aren't listening anyway but I don't think that warrants ignoring the problem under the guise of being tolerant. I think people are still told that a smoking addiction leads to poor heal
Re: (Score:2)
Shame-based approaches work by pushing someone to stop the activity. So you can try to shame someone into no longer smoking because they can get out of the shame by never smoking.
Never eating is not an option. And if people are going to treat you shitty for eating anyway, might as well eat a gallon of ice cream and get the dopamine hit.
Re: (Score:3)
Look, not everybody is a fat slob who runs around Wal Mart. Yea, as a whole we are over indulged here in the USA, but it's a function of our wealth (which is a function of our productivity, which is a function of past hard work..).
That is not even remotely true. In fact studies have shown quite clearly that obesity and poor health are inversely proportional wealth to a point. I.e. if you're not in a starving country and able to buy nasty shit you're far more likely to end up as an obese Walmart monster than a truly wealthy member of society who typically "indulges" in higher quality food. The USA is wealthy in aggregate, but that's about it. The wealth gap in your country keeps that wealth out of the hands of most, yet your obesity r
Japan & Europe are both wealthy (Score:3)
Re:Let's start by eating less... (Score:5, Interesting)
We aren't lazier than we were in the 60s. We're just a lot fatter.
The actual reason isn't clear. Many people believe it's our carb intake, and especially sugar/fructose. But that doesn't explain why our pets are fatter, farm animals are fatter, and even laboratory mice fed the same amounts as they used to be are fatter.
The medical/science industry blaming the problem on dietary fat is just wrong. It's pretty clear the anti-fat crusade was initiated by the sugar industry. The fact that doctors even today advise people to eat less fat is criminal, though.
Eat-less, move-more diets work for almost no one. Exercise makes you hungry. Calorie restriction slows down your metabolism, and starvation isn't sustainable. When you finally break you just get fatter than you were before. The metabolic slowdown lasts a long time.
I personally believe that a very low-carb, high (natural) fat diet can reverse the bad things that have happened to our metabolisms. At least it has had high success rates for the doctors who have patients practising it. And exercise is very good for you. But it won't make you lose weight.
There is still some other factor though that is causing everything around us to get fat and unhealthy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect we actually are lazier than the 60s. No, human nature hasn't changed, but the environment has. The reason for being fatter is diet and exercise - not much else really affects it (ok, disease can). These have changed since the 60s.
Improve your diet and exercise more and you won't be as fat. It isn't really all that difficult (but I realize you have to make a conscious choice - the default is to do what everyone around you is doing, and collectively diets are atrocious and the amount of exercise is
Re:Let's start by eating less... (Score:5, Interesting)
There was a study of rats a few years ago. They fed rats low calorie diets, one group in normal temperature, the other kept cold.
Of course they expected the cold rats to lose weight faster as they had to burn more. But they paradoxically lost it more slowly.
Autopsied showed their intestines had gotten longer or bigger or more efficient somehow, to extract more energy (don't remember the details.)
So one might look to the rollout of air conditioning around the world. The US first, so we lead the obesity way, then rich middle east countries, then places like Mexico that are very hot with impetus to buy these as costs come down and their economies improve.
Re: (Score:2)
I personally believe that a very low-carb, high (natural) fat diet can reverse the bad things that have happened to our metabolisms
Just like the fat-bad-carb-good crusade, this crusade is just bad science. People are fat because they eat too many calories, sugar, carbs, fats, whatever. People should be eating more vegetables, but nobody likes doing that, so they concoct one fad after another.
Eat-less, move-more diets work for almost no one.
These diets work for everyone who actually does them. The problems is that people don't do them, even if they say they are. Remember a diet is what you actually eat, not what you intend to eat. Exercise is what you do, not what you intend to
Re: (Score:3)
Spoken like a hard scientist. There was a time when I'd have said the exact same thing.
You're missing three very important things:
1) Basal metabolism
2) Extraction efficiency
3) Physical activity efficiency
Basal metabolism can vary tremendously. Two people sitting on their asses for an hour can burn vastly different amounts of calories. In particular, people sleeping can burn vastly different amounts of calories. If you did some heavy exercise during the day, it's quite likely you'll still be cranking through
Re: (Score:3)
While I am prepared to believe they eat more processed shit, I am not convinced the cats scratch more.
Do you really have credible evidence that pet cats and lab mice are doing less manual labour and smoking less?
Re:Let's start by eating less... (Score:4, Informative)
They put high fructose corn syrup in bread in the USA. Nobody else does that.
Re: (Score:2)
Are these rotund objects even still human any more? What happened?
Inactivity from sitting in front of screens rather than actually doing things and an abundance of food leading to large portion sizes and overeating.
Any other questions?
Re: (Score:2)
A "very small dose" of beer or wine will certainly not do any of the things you have described unless you have a severe alcohol intolerance.
I was referring to alcohol, fuckwit.